


ii : 7 i 
aay | meen | f Se 
‘ii : as | , : _— ep a ae 


HUTT 


B 4 O29 Obb 


yy} 
CA att 
he niginian 
AB reared 


po Wy 
y 


vt iM 
) 


73°) 


dy ) 
yi tah 
dvi yee! 
Lan 
tithes 
ti pate H 








LIBRARY 


OF THE 


UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 

















Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2008 with funding from 
Microsoft Corporation 


https://archive.org/details/onsyntaxofsomeprO0Oreedrich 





pris re it 
pas : 


j rien 
vi f . uy 4 ; re 


4 





The University of Chicago 


FOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER 





ON THE 


SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 
IN THE GREEK DIALECTS 


A DISSERTATION 


SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS 
AND LITERATURE IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE 


oF DocToR OF PHILOSOPHY 


(DEPARTMENT OF SANSKRIT AND INDO-EUROPEAN 
COMPARATIVE PHILOLOGY) 


BY 
IVY KELLERMAN 


PA A\BRAR 
fr or tHe 


UNIVERSITY | 
a OF a 


ee 


PRESS OF 
Tue New Era Printinc COMPANY, 
LANCASTER, PA 


1904 


ATT PAS OE 


“ OF THE ‘ an 
\ UNIVERSITY } \ 
NA CALIFORE 70% 
{4 $4 fs 
INTRODUCTION. 


A systematic treatment of dialect syntax is not as yet included 
in the abundant literature in the field of Greek dialectology. The 
most striking instances of variation from the usage of literary 
Greek are mentioned in general treatments of Greek syntax like 
Brugmann’s grammar, the Kiihner-Blass grammar, etc., and many 
points are noted in treatments of individual dialects. But no- 
where are these peculiarities brought together and placed in their 
dialectic and chronological relations, and no complete collections 
of examples have yet been made. Moreover, it is not only in- 
stances of divergent usage that are worthy of study, but the 
amount of agreement between the dialects and literary Greek 
should also be observed. It is quite as important to note whether 
this or that point of syntax is an independent development in 
one or more dialects, or whether it proves to be a peculiarity in- 
herited from early Greek, and panhellenic like certain phenomena 
in inflection and phonology, or lastly whether it is sufficiently 
similar to the use of the cognate word in other languages to be 
thought an inheritance from Indo-European. In each case, of 
course, the chronology and the possibility of the Attic influence 
must be taken into account. 

In the following paper the syntax of certain prepositions of 
allied meaning is considered. In Chapter I avté and mpé are 
compared throughout the dialects; in Chapter II uép, audi, and 
mepi, and in Chapter III ctv, wera and medd. Complete collec- 
tions of examples have been attempted, and all the uses of these 
prepositions which occur in the dialects are noted. In Chapter 
IV the peculiarities of usage of additional prepositions in various 
dialects are gathered together, from the obviously independent 
dialectic development of a7é and é« with the dative in Arcado- 
Cyprian to the use of mapa with the accusative for the dative 
which seems to characterize Greek in general at earlier or later 
stages in the dialects and in literature. 

1 


a we. 2 cee eh 


2 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS. 


The basis of the collection of examples is Collitz?’ Sammlung 
der Griechischen Dialekt-Inschriften (cited as SGDI.), supple- 
mented by later publications for certain dialects, as Hoffmann’s 
Griechische Dialekte (cited as Hoff.), Dittenberger and Purgold’s 
Inschriften von Olympia (cited as Ol. V.), various Corpus col- 
lections, and recent magazines, ete. For the brief outlines of the 
syntax of cognate prepositions, use has been made of the lexicons 
and grammars available for each language, the enumeration of 
which seems superfluous. Likewise it seems unnecessary to give 
a complete list of the abbreviations used for the various works 
consulted in regard to the Greek. The ordinary ones are em- 
ployed (except that Brugmann’s Kurze Vergleichende Grammatik 
is referred to as K. Vergl. Gr. and the Kiihner-Blass grammar as 
K-Bl.), and it is hoped that no references are given so briefly as 
to be unintelligible. 

The date of each example, except in Cyprian, where no dating 
has been attempted, is given in brackets immediately after the 
citation of its source. 

In conlusion an expression of thanks is due Dr. Carl Darling 
Buck, at whose suggestion this paper was undertaken, and under 
whose advice it has been completed. 


STARE TB. Wie Rote 
\. \ re Q A & > \y te 
OF THE *y 


UNIVE sRarry ) 






. 
Al LIFOR aN 


DR ramen 


CHAPTER I. 
avTi, pd. 


Cognates: 1. avté: Skt. anti (cf. I below), Goth. and, OHG. 
ant, AS. and, Lith. awit. The meaning in Goth. and OHG. is 
‘along, over,’’ and in Lith. ‘‘upon, over,’’ the development of 
each of which is as yet unexplained. 

2. mpd: Skt. pra, Lat. pro, Goth. fra, OHG. fora (furt), AS. 
for (fore), Lith. pra (pro), OB. pro (pra). In Skt., Goth., 
Lith. and OB. this appears only as a verbal prefix. 


I. Puacs. 


Sanskrit antz is with one exception uniformly considered an 
adverb, meaning ‘‘opposite, in front of, near,’’ as R.V. 1, 176, 1, 
catrum anti na vindasi, ‘*You find no foe before you.’’ The 
Petersburg lexicon gives a single example of its use as a preposi- 
tion, namely, Bhagavatapurina in Cabdakalpadruma, mugdha- 
prabhitavadupeyatur anti matroh, “subject to foolish fear the 
two approached before the two mothers.”’ 

This is ignored by Brugmann and by Delbriick, who expressly 
state that there is no occurrence of the preposition with cases, 
and evidently it is not an example important enough for any 
conclusions to be based upon. 

The idea ‘‘in front of’’ is given in Sanskrit by words kindred 
to pra in origin, as puras, ete., and by other altogether different 
expressions. Examples of puras with the accusative, genitive and 
ablative respectively are: R. V. 5, 82, 8, ya ime ubhe ahani pura 
ety aprayucchan svddhir, ‘*who goes before these two—day and 
night, attentive, fair-minded,’’ Cak. p. 62, line 23 (Bohtlingk, 
after stanza 103), tatah praviganti gautamisahitah—puragcaisim 
kancuki, ‘‘then enter the companions of Gautami, and before 
them the attendant,’’ R. V. 3, 53, 22, na gardabham puro agvan 
nayanti, ‘‘they do not place the ass before the horse.’’? Examples 

3 


4 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


of purastat in a similar use are R. V. 3, 8, 2, samiddhasya ¢raya- 
manah purastad brahma vanvano ajaram, suviram, ‘‘ Placed be- 
fore the enkindled face, awakening prayer, ageless, powerful,’’ 
and Ag. Grhy. 1, 11, 6, tasya [| pagoh] purastad ulmukam haranti, 
‘*In front of the victim they bear a blazing stick.’’ Puratas is 
used only adverbially, and pura has no local meaning, unless it 
may be suggested in examples like the following: R. V. 8, 44, 30, 
pura ’gne duritebhyah puré mrdhrebhyah, kave, pra na ayur vaso 
tira, ‘‘extend our life, Agni, keeping it, wise being, far off from 
(2. e., in front of) misfortunes and foes.’’ 

An example of agre in the sense of ‘‘in front of’’ is Pafic. 286, 
tasya agre niciksipa [se. pallavani], ‘‘he cast the young shoots 
down before her,’’ and of agratas, as Paiic. 274, tau mtroragrato 
vihasantau—icatuh, ‘‘the two, laughing in the presence of the 
fathers,—told,’’ ete. Still other expressions are shown in the 
use of samaksam, as Kathas. 4, 79, satyam samaksam asmakam 
anenangikrtam dhanam, ‘‘forsooth in our presence the deposit 
was promised by him,’’ samipa, as Nala 1, 15, tasyah samipe tu 
nalam pracagansuh, ‘‘in her presence they praised Nala,’’ sam- 
mukhe, as Vikramorvaci Act II (a Prakrit passage after stanza 
11), edam bhuanganimmoam via sammuhe no nivadidam, ‘‘this 
like a cast-off snake skin fallen down before us.”’ 

Latin ante takes the accusative, as Plaut. Amph. 292, sed quis 
est homo quem ante aedis video hoc noctis? But the archaic use 
seems to have been that of the ablative, according to Servius ad. 
Ecl. 1, 29 (post longo tempore), antiqui enim post, ante, circum 
etiam ablatiwo jungebant, and Pompeius 278, 21K, ante, post, 
propter, praeter, cum sint accusativae prepositiones—tamen apud 
maiores nostros inveniuntur etiam ablatiwae. Puta non dubitat 
Pacuvius dicere ‘ante templo.’ Brugmann suggests that the 
accusative is due to the use of this case with post, the opposite of 
ante. 

In comparing ante and pro, it seems that ante is preferred in 
the local meaning. It denotes that one has something in front 
of him, while pro means that he has the object behind him and is 
protecting it, or similar ideas which lead easily to a figurative 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 5 


development. The proof of a local use of pro in early times is 
slight. Pro moene occurs in Naevius, but there is no example 
from comedy. Yet this is doubtless due to chance, for expres- 
sions like pro rostris, contione, tribunalz, etc., common in classical 
times, must have been previously in fairly general use. Besides 
the simple meaning ‘‘in front of,’’ shown in Cic. Phil. 3, 11, 27, 
sedens pro aede, ete., a further development is shown in the force 
‘on the front part of,’’ and then ‘‘on,’’ which is seen in Tac. A. 
14, 30, stabat pro litore acies, or Cic. Fam. 3, 8, 21, pro tribunali 
cum aliquid ageretur, ete. The related preposition prae had a 
local sense in early Latin only in the expression prae manu, used 
by the comedians. An example from Cicero is Phil. 2, 12, prae 
se pugionem tulit. In later Latin it gained ground, as Liv. 1, 7, 4, 
prae se armentum agens, although it never becomes a common 
usage, and does not seem to appear in the Romance languages. 
Another preposition to express ‘‘in front of’’ is coram, which was 
only an adverb in ante-classical times, the first examples of its 
use as a preposition being Cic. Pis. 6, 12, coram genero meo and 
Fam. 13, 6, a, 1, credo te memoria tenere me et coram P. Cuspio 
tecum locutum esse. It does not occur elsewhere in classical prose, 
or in Livy, or the poets, and is never very common. Apud is 
occasionally used in the sense of coram, as Cic. Verr. 2, 20, verba 
apud senatum fecit, Plaut. Amph. 591, miseriast servo bono apud 
erum qua vera loquitur. (For the Romance development of apud, 
ef. Chapter III, pp. 51 f. 

In the Romance languages ante remains the regular preposition 
in this meaning, whether in the simple form or compounded with 
other prepositions. 

Faur and Faura (Skt. puras, Grk. mapa) are the nearest syn- 
tactic equivalents of 7p¢ to be seen in Gothic. Faur in the local 
meaning has however the sense of 7apa with the accusative, and 
faura often equals éumpooGev, kata with the accusative, and mapa 
with the dative and accusative. But there are some examples of 
faura in the sense of wpe, as Mark 1, 2, sat, ik insandja aggilu 
meinana faura Pus, saei gamanweiP wig Peinana faura Pus, (600 
ATOTTEAAW TOV ayyEXOV ou TPO TpogwTrou Gov, ds KaTacKEVdTEL THY 


6 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


odov éumpoobéy cov. ‘The use of a phrase rather than the simple 
preposition is seen in Mark 2, 12, usiddja faura andwairpja 
allaize, é&MAOev évaytiov Tavrev. 

In Old High German these two prepositions faur and faura 
are represented by fora. That Gothic faur represents two Indo- 
European forms is seen from its parallelism in some respects with 
Old High German furi (from *perv), which originally had a local 
meaning, being used with the accusative to denote direction, as 
nt haban waz th gisezze furi inan, ‘‘I have nothing which I could 
set before the man,’’ while fora with the dative expresses rest, as 
th antluhhu durt fora vmu, ‘‘I open the door before him.’’ In 
modern German these two prepositions again fell together to some 
extent and suffered interchange of meanings, so that by a new 
distinction fiir was crowded out except in derived uses, and vor 
became the regular local and temporal preposition. But examples 
of the retention of fiir in the local sense occur, as dass ich gleich 
fiir die rechte schmiede ginge (Goethe). In Anglo-Saxon for 
and fore occur side by side, as C. P. 134, 2, hat ste—forsewen for 
monna eigum, ‘‘ Let it beeome—despised before men’s eyes,’’ and 
Be. 568, 25, hine eadmodlice on eorfan astrehte fore done B, ‘‘he 
prostrated himself humbly on the earth before that B,’’ Be. 520, 9, 
Paet ha segen fore him baeron aet gefeohte, ‘‘that they bore in 
battle the standards before him.’’ Compounds of the temporal 
and adverbial foran also occur, as Jos. 8, 22, he feaht him wid- 
foran, ‘‘he fought before him,’’ Jos. 3, 6, gad aetforan Pam folce, 
‘‘he walked on in front of the people,’’ Mark 6, 14, daet hi— 
toforan him asetton, ‘‘ gave them—to set before them,’’ Mark 1, 2, 
nu ic asende minne engel beforan Pinre ansyne, ‘‘ behold I send my 
messengers before thy face.’” An example resembling the Latin 
sedit pro tribunali (cf. above p. 5) is perhaps to be seen in John 
19, 18, saet aetforan domselle, ‘‘sat down in the judgment seat.’’ 
In Early English for occurs, as Beow. 722, he for eaxlum gestod 
Denige frean, ‘‘he stood before the shoulders of the Danes’ lord.’’ 
An example of the simple foran is Cynewulf, Crist, 341 (Grein.), 
Nu we on faet bearn foran breostum stariad, ‘‘ Now we see the 
child on (= before) thy breast.’? Of the compounds of foran, 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 7 


aetforan was soon given up. An example from Middle English 
is Layamon I, 288, atforan al his folke he his kinehelm onfeng, 
‘‘Before all his people he received his helmet.’? Toforan re- 
mained longer, as Alis. 2989, afterward tofore my sight On a treo 
they schole beo pyght. An example of afore is Ipom. 873, she 
gan down falle On swonne, afore hyr maydens alle. This last 
preposition remains in the older literature and dialectically in 
Modern English. The Early English before, as R. of Gl. p. 86, 
a crois—ys men bifore hym bere, became the regular preposition 
for this meaning in Modern English, all the other compounds, 
except afore (fore), being completely crowded out, and for re- 
maining only in figurative senses. 

In Early English and ‘‘with, against’’ (cf. Gothic p- 3) shows 
also the meaning ‘‘before,’’ as Cd. 1, halfdon dream and heora 
ordfruman, ‘‘had joy before their creator.’’ 

In Lithuanian the idea of ‘‘in front of’’ is expressed by de- 
rivatives from nouns or adverbs. Pirm, which corresponds etymo- 
logically to mp@ros and Skt. pirvas, is used, although rarely, as 
Mark 1, 2, dsz siunczit saivo angela pirm taves, ‘I send my angel 
before you.’’ Prész (a strengthened form of pré) sometimes 
shows this meaning, as prész ke nuswumti, ‘‘to take off the hat be- 
fore one.’? A compound of this preposition with akis ‘‘eye’’ is 
used in the locative case, as jis std mano pryszaky, ‘‘he stands 
before me,’’ and the same idea is expressed by pd aki (‘‘ under, 
before the eyes of’’) as Mark 2, 12, iszejo po aki vist, ‘‘he went 
out before them all.’’ Words which sometimes have the meaning 
‘‘in front of’? are tés (a shortened form), from the adjective tésds 
‘<straight, erect,’’ as tés buti ‘‘ before the house,’’ though its usual 
sense is that of ‘‘opposite,’’ and szalé, a locative of the noun szalis 
“‘side,’’ as szalé biito ‘‘before (beside) the house.’’? This latter 
expression is similar to the use of pré ‘‘beside,’’ in examples like 
pré bito, ‘‘before the house,’’ ete. 

The only preposition in Old Bulgarian which means ‘‘before’’ 
is prédu, as Mark 1, 2, azt posiilya anhli moi prédi litsemi 
tvoima, amoctéAXw Tov ayyeACv wou pd Tpocwrov cov, and Mark 
2, 12, izide prédi visémi, éfrOev éevavtiov wavrwv. In Modern 


8 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Russian the same word appears, in the forms predi, peredii, predo 
and peredo, used with the accusative and the instrumental. 
Literary Greek seems to show but one example of the use of avri 
in a local meaning, namely Xen. An. 4, 7, 6, (TO ywpiov éati) dacd 
mitvot Svarerrovoas peyddas, av dv éotnkdtes avdpes ti av 
maoyxorev; the only occurrence of it in the Attic inscriptions is CIA. 
II, 835, 68 [820-317] aozives tpeis, ev als év tarmevs Kal omnditns 
avtt tod Mivotavpov. Derivatives from the preposition and other 
words take its place to some extent, as évavtiov, common from 
Homer on, avria and avtiov, chiefly poetic and Ionic (avriov is 
hardly to be found in Attic prose), avta (poetic) and the later 
and less common évavtt, a7révavtt, évorriov, KaTevworov, etc. On the 
other hand, 7pé is very common in the local meaning, as Od. 24, 
468 nyepéGovto mpo doreos, Thuc. 3, 75, THY wpo Tov “Hpaiov, ete. 


1. avri. 

Delphian. SGDI. 2607, 4 [240-239], avti 5€ rod yepotexviov To 
MPOTKAVLOY LOTATW. 

Cretan. SGDI. 4991, I, 40 [middle 5th cent.], «adrtov arti 
partipwv dvav émt Tat vat. This expression is common in the 
early inscriptions.* An example of ‘vavts (=évavte) occurs SGDI. 
5125, A, 2 [ea. middle 5th cent.]. Likewise in Delphian in the 
later inscriptions évavtt and évaytiov occur, as SGDI. 2072, 17, 26 
[198]. 

2. mpd. 

Ionic. Mitth. 20, 242, 14 [Roman], xa@iépwcev—rta mpo rijs 
olKias épyaornpia. 

Argive. SGDI. 3339, 109 [1st half 4th cent.], 0 dé rou apo Tod 
aBdarov Kelyevoyv nuxe. Other examples are SGDI. 3340, 113 
[1st half 4th cent.], CIGP. et Ins. 841, 23 [end 3rd cent. ]. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 3755, 11 [after 3rd cent.], Téd]€ TO Yradiopa 
éotdra AOi[va] Oérw mpo Tod ayopavop[fov. Cf. also [GIns. I, 
1, 8 [ pre-Roman ]. 

*SGDI. 4991, Il, 28, 32; IU, 46, 55; XI, 53; 4998, II, 9; 4986, 4, 10 [both 


in middle 5th cent.], 4992, 1, 7, 5072, b, 10 [‘‘aus guter Zeit’’]. Also 4991, 
VILL, 55, rebGev [av]ri xéou[w]v, 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 9 


Theran. SGDI. 4772, 4 [4th cent.], “Ayoprous dé [8] edmvoy xai 
ta[p]a& mpo Tod capnuov. 

Coan. SGDI. 3636, 30 [end 4th cent. ], é«]omevder xvALKa olvou 
Kexpapévov [7 ]po tov [ Bod |s. 

For a discussion of avté and mpé in this use, ef. the general 
comparison of the two prepositions given under figurative uses, 
III, p. 18, and for a chronological summary of the local in com- 
parison with temporal uses, ef. II, p. 13. 


3. mpd = mpds. 

Ionie. OIGS. I, 235, 45 [ca. 887], xaBevdev— rors péev avdpas 
év Tot po Hous Tod Bwpod, Tas Sé ybvatxas év Tot mpo éorré[pys . . . 

This seems to be unparalleled in the dialects and in literary 
Greek, although somewhat similar phrases are perhaps to be seen 
in such expressions as I]. 4, 382, of & ézei obv @yovto td€ mpo dd00 
éryevovTo. 

II. Tre. | 

The temporal meaning ‘‘before’’ is expressed in Sanskrit to 
some extent by the same prepositions which occur in the local 
sense. The only example of puras expressing time given in the 
Petersburg lexicon is Cak. 189, tava prasaddasya purastu sam- 
padah, ‘‘before your favor [goes] blessing.’’ An instance of 
purastat is Ait. Br. 3, 29, tasmat adityarambhamam—purastat 
tasya yajaty,—‘‘ therefore the beginning is with the Adityas—at 
the commencement of it one sacrifices,—’’ ete. There is one ex- 
ample of puratas in a temporal sense (given as adverbial in the 
Petersburg lexicon), namely, MBh.1, 8404 puratah krechrakalasya 
dhimaijagarti pirusah, ‘‘before a season of danger a man is 
watchful over his thoughts.’’ Pura is fairly common in this 
meaning, as R. V. 2, 28, 5, ma matra cary apasah pura ritoh, 
‘*do not break the measure of the work before the time.’’ The 
most frequent prepositions in this sense are however the words 
prak and ptrvam, from the adjectives prac and pirva, as 
Kathop. 4, 6, yah piirvam tapaso jatamadbhyah pirvamajayata, 
‘*the first-born from the penance, who was created before the 
waters,’’ and Cak. 118, pragantariksagamandat, ‘‘before flying off 
into the sky.”’ 


10 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


In Latin ante is used, as Plaut. Amph. 602, ante lucem a portu 
me praemisisti domum. This is in widespread use, and pro does 
not occur in a temporal sense. The same distinction remains in 
the Romance languages, a third he oases in Italian being prima, 
as prima di pranzo. 

Of Gothic faura and faur, only the latter is used in a temporal 
sense, as Matth. 8, 29, gamt her faur mel bahvjan unsis? 7rOes 
@de apo kapod Bacavica yas; and Matth. 26, 75, pate faur 
hanins hruk prim sinbam afaikis me, ott wpiv aréetopa povicat 
Tpls amapynon we. In Old High German fora is the only form of 
the preposition fora, furi found in the temporal meaning, as dher 
aer fora dhir was, ‘‘ who in olden times was before you,’’ and fora 
themo itmalen tage, ‘‘before that solemn day.’’ This distinction 
remains in Modern German, vor being the temporal preposition, 
as vor Morgens, vor dret Wochen, etc., while fiir does not occur in 
such a sense. In Anglo-Saxon for occurs, as Wulfstan 96, 7, da 
de waeron fordferede for hund gearum, ‘‘when they went away 
a hundred years ago (== before),’’ but this soon gave way in 
favor of various prepositions consisting of compounds of -foran, 
used without distinction in meaning, as shown in the following 
examples: Sax. Chr. 1010, Aetforan Andreas maessandaeg fa 
com he her, ‘‘before the festival of St. Andrew he came hither.’’ 
Sax. Chr. 1106, Waeron gesewen twegen monan—toforan Pam 
dege, ‘‘ Two moons were seen before that day.’’ Wulfstan 96, 10, 
nu we Paene fyrst nabbad, fe fa haefdon, be widforan us waeron, 
‘‘now we do not have the time which they had who were before 
us.’’ Sax. Chr. 894, Pa gegaderade sio laf—muicelne here onforan 
winter, ‘‘then the remnant gathered together—a great army be- 
fore the winter,’’ Psa. civ, 15, he him snoterne beforan sende 
eéryst, ‘‘he sent first a wise [man] before him.’’ Not all of these 
compounds are found in Early English. Aetforan disappeared, 
but toforan remained somewhat longer, as P. Ploughm. 7683, 
Lyneris toforan us useden to make,— etc., and onforan, as Ipom. 
619, By halfe yere afore the day, That it be know ferre and nere. 
Beforan is fairly common, as R. of Gl. p. 27, Hire lord was kyng 
bifore hire ten yer. Of these Modern English shows before as 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 11 


the regular temporal preposition, afore occurring only in dialectic 
and early examples. The use of for to express duration of time 
or in general expressions like ‘‘for the first time,’’—etc., occurs 
in Early English, as P. Ploughm. 688, to dwelle there for evere, 
but not in Anglo-Saxon. The resemblance of the usage to that of 
French pour, Italian per, Spanish por is clear, and shows that it is 
probably borrowed from this Romance development. 

Anglo-Saxon has still another preposition to express the tem- 
poral meaning ‘‘before,’’ namely aer (Goth. air, OHG. ér, etc.), 
as Matth. 8, 29, come du Ider aer tide us to Preagenne, ‘* Hast 
thou come hither before the time to test us?’’ An Early English 
example is Alis. 344, aboute mydnyght, ar the day, the forms in 
which it appeared being er, ar, or. In Modern English it remains, 
in the form ere, but only in poetic language. 

In Lithuanian pirm is the only temporal preposition expressing 
‘‘before,’’ as tat purm szeszvit nedéliu nusidavé, ‘‘that happened 
six years ago.’’ Old Bulgarian uses prédi, as Supr. 201, 17, 
prédi: sintima molitvy tvoryase, ‘‘before sleep he offers prayer,’’ 
though no example in a temporal force seems to occur in the codex 
Marianus, where instead prézde is used, as Matth: 8, 29, priselit 
est sémo prézde vrémene macitii nasi, HrAOes Ode mpo Karpov 
Bacavicat npas; 

In literary Greek the regular usage is that of mp0, as Od. 15, 24, 
mpo yapo.o, Xen. Cyr. 5, 5, 39, mpd Setrrvov, etc. A development 
to a temporal force in avi, as in the two dialect examples quoted 
below, does not occur. 

1. avti. 

Delphian. SGDI. 2561A, 45 [early 4th cent.], ayev 5€ tazen- 
Aaia avi féreos. 

Coan. SGDI. 3636, 43 [end 4th cent.], mpo[ayopev]érw ayvev- 
ecOas yuvarkds Kal a[vdpd]s avti vuKrds. 

With these examples is to be compared the Hesychian gloss @yvt’ 
érous: Tov avTov gros: Aaxa@ves, although the Laconian inscriptions 
show no such use of avtt. The meaning in both these examples is 
**before the end of,’’ consequently ‘‘during the year, the night.’’ 


12 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Hicks JHS. 9, 336 compares Theognis 344 dofv & avr’ aviwv 
avias, but ‘‘grief upon grief,’’ the translation of Liddell and Scott, 
is undoubtedly the meaning here, so that the example evidently is 
not parallel to these dialect uses. 


2. mpd. 

Ionic. Rev. d. Phil. 25, 166 [350-325], r[ov] Sedtepov cxadn- 
[r6]v [unvos] tavpecdvos mpo etxdd[ os. 

Thessalian. SGDI. 345, 43 [after 214], ra yadpicuarta to Te 
tm(m)po [T] as yevepevo(v) kat ro Tau(o)v. Fick 1. c. reads d1(7)po- 
Tas, doubtless with the same meaning intended as if the words 
were separated (as by Hoffmann, Michel, Herwerden and others). 

Delphian. SGDI. 2501, 37 [380], éfaxeioOwv po Ilv0[ i] ov 
Stives Ka Séwvrat. 

Laconian. SGDI. 4689, 11 [90], év rau évdexarax unvi, po Tov 
pvotnplov. 

Megarian. SGDI. 3052, 19 [end of 3rd or beginning of 2nd 
cent. |, €v] Tau Ilerayertvion pnvi mpo tas Se[ Karas. 

Argive. SGDI. 3294, 4 [Roman], ¢$vAo[reulas] peylor(a)s 
mapacy[dvta] ws ovdels av po a[vT] ov. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 3749, 48 [220-200], mndé otpatevésOo— 
xopis Sco po Tacde TAS cUVOnKas éEeotpaTevKavTt. 

Theran. SGDI. 4706, 161 [end 3rd cent.], 7po tov trav ovvodov 
jueVv Tpo apepav Séxa. 

Cretan. SGDI. 4991, I, 2 [middle 5th cent.], po dias pr) 
ayer. 

In all of the dialects from which examples are here given* there 
are other instances as well. The frequency of mpd in the temporal 
sense is quite in contrast with the small number of examples of its 
occurrence in other uses, and of the occurrence of avr in any use. 
(Elsewhere throughout this chapter all the examples of 7pé and 
avtt that occur are quoted.) The only example of 7pé of especial 
interest here is from Delphian, its date being about the same as 
that of the example of avti given above. Doubtless it may be 


*The only example from Boeotian is in a section composed in Attic, namely 
SGDI. 488, 26 [223-197]. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 13 


assumed that Delphian retained the early Greek use of both these 
prepositions in this force. A summary of the occurrence of avri 
and mp¢ in the temporal and local uses is given in the following 
table: 


























Place Time 
avri pd avri pd 
Tonic Roman 350 
Thessalian after 214 
Delphian | 240-239 early 4th cent.) 380 
Laconian 90 
Megarian end 3rd or begin- 
ning 2nd cent. 

Argive first part 4th cent. Roman 
Rhodian after 3rd cent. 220-200 
Theran 4th cent. end 3rd cent. 
Coan end 4th cent. end 4th cent. 
Cretan middle 5th cent. middle 5th cent. 





III. Fievrative Usss. 

The figurative developments of avt/ and mp¢ in literary Greek, 
and of their equivalents in other languages, are here disregarded 
- except when they are parallel to the usages in the dialects shown 
by the examples given under the four following headings. 

A general comparison of the use of these two prepositions in 
Greek with that in Latin, the only other language which keeps 
both in their original significance, shows the tendency of develop- 
ment to be exactly the opposite in Greek from what appears in 
Latin. In Greek the local meaning is given by mp0, with the 
exception of the two Attic and two dialect examples of avté quoted 
I,1, p. 8. In Latin it is given by ante. For the temporal mean- 
ing as well Greek uses mp¢, the only appearance of avt/ being in 
two dialects and a Hesychian gloss (cf. II, 1, p. 11). Latin uses 
ante. But in figurative developments, while Latin uses pro, 
Greek shows avr/, with the exception again of two dialects quoted 
below, and certain limited developments in Attic, where the force 
remains close to the local meaning, in expressions of protection 
and defence. (In Attic in the meaning ‘‘for the advantage of,”’ 
it is not so common as v7ép. In Representation the idea ‘‘in 
the interest of’’ is always present; it rarely denotes equivalence 


14 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


like avti, as Soph. El. 495, wpo tévde, and is common in com- 
parisons, as atpe/o@ai 1 mpd twos.) It is interesting to note that 
of the two dialects which show av7é in a local meaning, Delphian 
has also avté in a temporal sense, beside an example of mpé of 
almost as early date, and Cretan has instances of 7p¢ in a figura- 
tive meaning. Again, the parallelism to Latin shown in the fig- 
urative use of mpé in Laconian is emphasized by the Hesychian 
gloss referred to above, indicating a temporal use of avré in that 
dialect. This suggests that prehistoric Greek had both preposi- 
_ tions in general use in all three meanings, but the specialization 
had advanced so far at the time of the separation that only five 
dialects (including Attic) varied from the development uniformly 
shown in the other dialects and in literary Greek, and show ex- 
amples parallel to those which appear in Latin as the regular 
development in that language. These facts are given in tabular 
form below, the parentheses indicating lack of importance because 
of late date or (in Attic) because of the rarity of examples. For 
the sake of completeness, the uses in the other languages are also 
given here briefly, the summary showing that on the whole *pro 
or words of kindred etymology were preferred not only in one or 
two of these three uses, as in Greek and Latin, but in all of them. 























Local. Temporal. Figurative. 

Sanskrit uras, etc. ura, etc. sthane, etc. 
Gothic aur, faura aur faur, faura 
Lithuanian pirfh piri uz 
Old Bulgarian prédii prédii, prézde za, pro 
Latin ante ante pro 
Greek (except as 

below) (avrt), pd mpd avti, (1pé) 
Delphian avri avri, mpd avri 
Laconian [dors], (p6) avri, mpd 
Coan pd avri avri 
Cretan avri po mpd 

1. avi. 
a. Instead of. 


Sanskrit expresses this idea without the aid of snepoaniees by 
sthana, ‘‘place,’’ in the locative, either independently or at the 
end of compounds, and by similar methods. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 15 


In Latin pro is used, as Cato ap. Front., p. 149, nunquam ego. 
argentum pro vino congiario—disdidi. Other means of giving 
the idea are suggested by the following examples: Cic. Inv. 2, 
49, 144, haec filcum swum sibi praemit loco deposcit, Plaut. Rud. 
814, vos respondetote istine istarum vicem, Plin. 31, 10, 46, §115, 
an pane salis vico utuntur nitro. In the Romance languages pro 
in this use seems to have disappeared, and only phrases occur, as 
French @ sa place, au lieu de, en place de, Italian in luogo di, in’ 
vece di, and Spanish en lugar de, en vez de. It happens, doubt- 
less by accident only, that there is no example of a preposition of 
this meaning in the Gothic material which is extant. In Old 
High German furz and fora occur, as daz th unreht ne finde fure 
reht, ‘‘that I never find wrong in place of right,’’ and fora enu 
am ist kiridono uunilust, ‘‘they have instead of law the pleasure 
of desires.’? Um2bz is also used, as sie gaben mir ubel umbe guot, 
‘*they gave me evil for good.’’ ‘Modern German uses phrases, as 
an Stelle jemandes, and statt and anstatt from the old noun Statt. 

In Anglo-Saxon for is used, as Matth. 2, 22 Archelaus rixode 
on Judea Peode for daene Herodem, ‘‘ Archelaus ruled over the 
Judean people in place of that Herod.’’ Phrases also occur, as 
Sax. chr. 693, Brihtwald gehalgode Tobian on his steall, ‘‘ Briht- 
wald hallowed Tobias in his stead,’’ ete. The same use of phrases 
remains, as Maundev., p. 67, Thez ete it in stede of spice, and 
Ms. b. Halliw. (v. stede) songe a balad o-stede of the masse. In 
the later language in place was often substituted for instead, corre- 
sponding to the French @ la place, and the expression in lieu is 
borrowed directly from the French en lieu. 

In Lithuanian the conjunction wuzidét expresses this idea, as 
bérnas (u)2idt dirbes mégt, ‘‘the boy sleeps instead of working.’’ 
The simple wz has rather the meaning of ‘‘in behalf of’’ (cf. Ch. 
IT, ITI, p. 34) and the use of véto, as kalbék mano vétoje, ** speak 
for me’’ is a Germanism. Old Bulgarian shows the phrase vi- 
mésto, as Matth. 2, 22, slusavi ze yako Archelai tsetvuyett vit 
Iudei vit Iroda mésto, axotcas Sé br’ Apyédraos Baciredver ert Tis 
*lovdaias avrt ‘Hpaddov. 

In literary Greek and the Attic inscriptions avr/ is the regular 


16 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


preposition, as Od. 20, 307 avti yapouo rdpov, Thue. 1, 129, Tov 
mohe“ov av7’ etpnvns wetadapBavew, CIA. I, 469, 2 [before 403], 
avril ydpou mapa Gedy TovTO Aaxovor d6vowa. With personal objects 
mpo is also used, as Xen. An. 7, 6, 36, aypumveiv mpd Tivos, but, 
more frequently than either avt/ or 7p, v7rép is used in this sense,. 
the development for vwép and mpé being from the meaning ‘‘in 
bonalt of.”? “CF Ch: fh TH p34. 


a. Wzuth wmpersonal objects. 
Tonic. Hoff. III, 128, 4 [end 4th cent.], Aayperar ta yepea Ta 


avuTa Kal Kodfv avti [7] (H)s w@pns. 

Cyprian. SGDI. 60, 5, a(v)tl 7 picO@v Kal a(v)tl Ta byjpov 
do¢évai—ra[ravtov]—i Sugavor vd a(v)Ti TH apytpov Tade TO 
ta[Xavtwv|—rov x@pov. Similar expressions occur also in lines 
10 and 17. 

Delphian. SGDI. 2561A, 18 [early 4th cent.], Ta naka avti 
Tav ayabev [dSopuev]. The same phraseology occurs in SGDI. 
2501, 9 [380]. 

Laconian. SGDI. 4680, 27 [2nd cent.], €]¢ det Svad0Ojwev tov 
citov Tau [xpe| lav éxovtt, Kal m[dc0s éotl arrodotéos ot] Tos avti Tov 
d:ado00€vtos. | 

Argive. CIGP. et Ins. I, 623, 4 [1st cent. B. C. or A. D.], 
avti 5€ Oadrrwpav [OjKa yovedat ydous. This is evidently an epic 
imitation, as is also the following example. 

Cretan. Mon. Ant. XI, 475 no. 2, 5 [8rd or 2nd cent.], avti 
yamou yoepov pédos elaye Opyvwv otdpvovy apetphtar mé[v] Oe rerpo- 
peva. 


8B. With personal objects. 
Delphian. SGDI. 1832, 11 [173], e& 8¢ te avOpmrwwov yévorto 


mepl Twa TOV KoLvVav—éheréoOwy GrXrov avT avToD—ei Sé pr Oéroe 
"Apovras 7) Swrnpryos avtl Ta atroyevouevovy — ovvepaipeto bau. 
Laconian. SGDI. 4689, 6 [90], av dé Tis un OéreL Opvdery,— 
&dXov avtl Tovrov KAapwoaTo. 
Argive. OIGP. et Ins. 1062, 3 [Roman], és tepéos ‘Ep] ua- 


icxov tod Mapxouv—av7’ avtod é 6 matnp Mapxos ‘Eppaicxov. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 17 


This distinction between the use with impersonal and personal 
objects has been made in order to facilitate a comparison of avi 
in the latter with zpé and t7ép in legal representation, where a. 
parallelism is evident. For a fuller statement and a tabular 
summary, cf. under imep, Ch. II, III, 3, pp. 34 ff. 


b. In return for. 


Latin expresses this by pro, as Caes. B.G. 6, 16, pro vita hominis 
nist homims vita reddatur, non posse deorum vmmortalium numen 
placart. In Italian per is used, as comprare, vendere per mille 
lure. The phrase in contraccambvo is also used, as ma tu fammi un 
piacere im contraccambio di queste lodi. French uses powr, as 
faire troc pour troc, and also phrases, as en retour de. Spanish 
shows por, as comprar, vender, dar por cien dablones. 

In Gothic und (related to éote, Delphian év7e, cf. K. Vergl. Gr. 
§907 anm.) is used, as Matth. 5, 38, augo und augin jah tunpu 
und tunPau, opOarpov avti ofOarpod kal ddcvta ari oddvros. Faur 
corresponds usually to v7rép, but the meaning ‘‘in return for’’ is 
perhaps to be seen in examples like Cor. I, 15, 3, ec Xristus gaswalt 
faur frawaurhtins unsaros, 611 Xpuotos arébavev drrép Tay dwapTiav 
nuav. In Old High German the same use occurs, as ist arhaban 
fora kinnizidu dera sinera listi, ‘‘he is praised in return for the 
science of his art.’’ In Anglo-Saxon for is used, as Matth. 5, 38, 
eage for eage and tof for teP, opOarpov avi opOarpod Kal oddvta 
avti oddvtos. Early English shows the same usage, as P. Ploughm. 
253, for tht rightful rulyng Be rewarded in hevene. In Anglo- 
Saxon wid and mid give the same idea, with words of weighing, 
selling, ete., as Exod. 21, 24, tod wid ted, ‘‘tooth for tooth,’’ Exod. 
21, 36, gilde oxan mid oxan, ‘‘he shall pay ox for ox.”’ 

Lithuanian uses wz, as Matth. 5, 38, dky uz aki, w danti uz danti, 
‘*an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’’ In Old Bulgarian 
vuzu is used, as John 1, 16, priyechomu blagodéti vizu blagodéti, 
"eda Bopev Kal ydpw avtl ydpitos, and also za, as Matth. 5, 38, oko 
za oko 1 zabu% za zabu, 6bOarpov avi obOarpod Kai dddvta avi 
OOdVTOS. 


In literary Greek avté is the only preposition used, as Il. 23, 


18 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


650, cot d€ Beot ravS’ avti yapww—Soiev; Lysias 106, 38, avt) moias 
evepyecias; the same is true of the dialects, as far as examples 
occur, so that this may be considered a general Greek usage. 

Ionic. Hoff. III, 79, 7 [early 5th cent.], dpyns & a[vr]’ ayabis 
Evo [mi] dns 1dde py [ju] a—érréorncev. 

Thessalian. BCH. 13, 392, no. 11, 6 [Roman], av@ oovod 
wuxis—rtyvd EXayov yapita. 

Boeotian. SGDI. 797, 2 [‘‘iltere und jungere Zeichen neben 
einander’’|, épywv av7’ ayabav pvaw’ avéBeKe rdde. 

Laconian, SGDI. 4660, 2 [Roman], todto—dyadpa att 
Karav épywv tcato IlovAvBiw. The same epigram occurs in Ol. 
V, 450 in an honorific decree concerning the same personage. It is 
also suggested by Fougéres BCH. 20, 145, for a restoration of a 
fragmentary inscription of equally late date from Mantinea. 

Corinthian. CIGP. et Ins. I, 365, 4 [‘‘recentior’’], av@ dv 
xarkelnv tTHVO eixdva Onxapev avdpes. 

Argive. CIGP. et Ins. I, 800, 3 [‘‘aetati remotissimae’’], 
TovTo—feépyov avr ay[a|Oav xnrdapepov éferéXeo(c)av. Similar 


examples are ib. 1099, 3 [400], 1117, 3 [192], 1475, 7 [Roman]. 


c. In distributwe sense, with a word of payment. 
Arcadian. Hoff. I, 29, 24 [1st half 4th cent.], e x av mapa- 
pakein OiacOnv Tas Kere[VO]w Tas Kaxemévav Kat’ ’Adéav, Tpis d5€dos 
opr€ [v av]ti fexdorav. The meaning evidently is ‘‘shall pay 
three obols for each (wagon).’’ This is undoubtedly a develop- 
ment from the use of avt/ to mean ‘‘in return for,’’ with words 


of buying, selling, etc. Jor other ways of expressing the idea, cf. 
under w7rép, ch. II, ITI, 4, a, p. 40. 


d. In a sense approaching that of purpose. 


Coan. SGDI. 3624b, 59 [ca. 205], [euais Zwrvpou—avti tod 
otvov XHHHH. Similar expressions occur in ib. c, 27, 33, and 
probably also in the fragmentary line ib. a, 55. The phrase ovv 
Tat TLwae TOU olvov X is found in ib. b, 42. Elsewhere the brief 
sentences give merely the proper names and the amount of money 
contributed. Newton, Ins. Br. Mus. II, p. 113, comments ‘‘ This 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 19 


contribution was mostly in money, but also in kind, as appears 
from the mention of wine.’’ According to this, the commonly 
accepted view, the translation of the passage in question would 
be, ‘‘ Fourteen hundred drachmas in the form of wine.’’ But for 
this no syntactic parallels can be adduced. (The only other ex- 
ample of avré in Coan is in a temporal sense, cf. II, 1, p. 11, and 
there is but one of mp¢; in a local meaning, cf. I, 2, p. 9.) The 
Homeric use of avté to express equivalence, followed by later uses 
like that in Hdt. 4, 75, todré ogu avi Nouvtpov éort, ‘‘serves as 
(7. e., instead of) a bath,’’ etc., are not similar. Consequently, 
since Newton’s interpretation is not supported by literary or 
dialectic parallels, and does not give to avt/a meaning which can 
be derived easily from the known uses of the preposition, it is per- 
haps best given up. A more legitimate translation seems to be 
‘*Fourteen hundred drachmas for wine.’’ This meaning of ‘‘for 
wine’’ (2. e., ‘‘to buy wine’’), comes naturally enough from the 
common meaning ‘‘instead of,’’ which must undoubtedly be the 
basal force. Likewise it suits the general context of the inscrip- 
tion, and especially the phrase in b, 42, quite as well as does 
Newton’s interpretation. 


2. mpc, In behalf of. 
For the expression of this idea in other languages, cf. under 
vrép, Ch. II, ITI, pp. 33 f., and for comment on the following ex- 
amples the subdivisions 2, p. 36, and 3, p. 39. Cf. also pp. 13 ff. 


a. In dedication. 


Heraclean. SGDI. 4630 [ca. 4th cent.], Hiotiala po avtavtas 
kat "Adpoditias Sépxas avéOnxe. 


b. In representation. 
Cretan. SGDI. 4991, I, 43 [5th cent.], aodenodtw—i adres 
4) Gdos mpo Trovrw. Other examples occur 4992, III, 5, 4985, 14. 


CHAPTER II. 
trrép, audi, repi. 


Cognates: 1. urdp. Skt upari, Lat. super, Goth. ufar, OHG. 
ubir, AS. ofer. 

2. audi. Skt. abha-tas (cf. below p. 24), Lat. am, amb-, OHG. 
umbi, AS. ymbe, Gall. ambi- (a verbal prefix). 

3. wept. Skt. part (OP. pariy), Lat. per, Goth. fair-, OHG. 
fir-, Lith. per. OB. pre-. (Cf. also p. 25, footnote. ) 


I. Puace. 
A. Above (urép). 

In Sanskrit wpari is most frequent with the accusative in this 
sense, as R. V. 4, 31, 15, asmakam uttamam krdhi ¢ravo devesu 
sirya varsistham dyam wopart, ‘‘make our glory highest among 
the gods, Siirya, highest above heaven.’’ With the genitive its 
use is post-Vedic, as Katy. Cr. Sutra 7, 3, 31, daksinasya bhruva 
upari, ‘‘above the right eyebrow.’’ With the locative it is of 
rare occurrence, but one example, R.V. 6, 85, 3, being given by 
the Petersburg lexicon. Another is doubtless Kathas. 1, 3, 58, 
uparyantahpurah sad ca ratnamityabhiracyate, ‘‘and she is pre- 
served like a jewel above (1. e., in the upper story of) the seraglio.’’ 

The instrumental seems to be used (so K. Vergl. Gr. $592, 2) 
in an example quoted under the genitive uses in the Petersburg 
lexicon (where bhumy& upari is assumed as the first stage), 
namely, R.V. 10, 75, 3, divi svano yatate bhumyopari, ‘‘in the 
heaven and over the earth the sound pervades.’’ The derivative 
uparistat has the same meaning, but is found only with the geni- 
tive (except in the Cat. Br., where the accusative also occurs), 
as Cat. Br. 5, 4, 1, 14, wparistagchirsnah, ‘‘over his head.’’ 

In Latin super commonly occurs with the accusative, as Caes. 
B.C. 2, 10, super lateres coria inducuntur. Its use with the 
ablative in this sense is rare and poetic, as Hor. Odes 3, 1, 17, 

20 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. pd 


ensis qui super cervice pendet. Supra is used with only the accu- 
sative, as Cic. N.D. 2, 87, 95, sv essent qua sub terra semper 
habitavissent—nec exissent wmquam supra terram, Plaut. Pers. 
819, lle qui supra nos habitat. 'The Romance usage is the same. 
French sur (representing both swper and supra)* is common, as 
un otseau gui plane sur la rivieére, and les villes qua sont sur la 
Seine. Examples from Italian are 2 nuvoli sopra le nostre teste, 
and veleggiano sul lago. From Spanish may be given fortolila 
sobre el olmo. 

An instance of Gothic ufar translating tbrép does not seem to 
occur, but it frequently has the meaning ‘‘above’’ or ‘‘over’’ 
where the Greek expresses the idea by altogether different words, 
as in the formula Matth. 6, 14, atta izwar sa ufar himinam, © 
maTnp 0 ovpamos, and Matth. 27, 45, warp riqis ufar allai airpat, 
éyéveto oKdT0s eri Tacay THY yhv. Examples of its use with the 
accusative are Eph. 4, 10, jah saet usstaig ufar allans himinans, «at 
6 avaBas vrepdvw TdvtTwv Tov ovipavev, John 6, 1, galaip Jesus ufar 
marein, arnrOev o "Inaois wépav tis Oardoons, Luke 4, 39, jah 
atstandands ufar ija gasok pPisat brinnon, Kal émictas érdvw avrijs 
ETETIUNTEV TH TUPETO. 

From Old High German examples of this preposition are th 
hepfu mina hant ubar sie, ‘‘I lift my hand over them,’’ and also, 
ubar allu gibirgu iudeno uuardun gimarit alla thisu uuort, ‘‘ Over 
all the mountains were all these words told.’’ It is common in 


* An exceedingly common meaning in this preposition is that of ‘‘upon,’’ as 
écrire sur du papier, etc. This is seen in Italian also, as sulla (supra la) tavola, and 
in Spanish. Such a development in sense is a natural one, if the object beneath be 
thought of as in immediate contact with the one over it, and it is not infrequently 
seen in the prepositions meaning ‘‘above.’’ An instance from Sanskrit is Kathas. 
10, 122, tenopari turamgasya grhitam tam nrpdtmajam apacgyagea, ‘‘ and he beheld that 
princess held by him upon his horse.’’ The same use occurs in Latin, as Cic. Leg. 
2, 26, 66, super terrae tumulum noluit quid statut, nisi columellam, Verg. Aen. 1, 295, 
saeva sedens super arma, Ecl. 1, 80, fronde super viridi, and in Old High German, as 
reganot ubar rehte inti ubar unrehte, ‘‘ he rains upon the just and the unjust.’’ This 
development does not seem to occur in izép, éxi being used instead. Likewise 
Gothic uses only ana, Modern German auf, Anglo-Saxon on (an), 0 (a), uppon, 
uppan, Lithuanian aft, and Old Bulgarian na. 


22 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Modern German, as Die Wolke steht tiber dem Berge, etc. An- 
other frequent expression is oberhalb, from ob- (no longer an 
independent word) and Halb ‘‘side’’ (cf. ausserhalb, etc.). 

In Anglo-Saxon ofer is used with the dative, to express rest 
above or over an object, as Bo. 366, 14, hi wuniaf nu ofer Paem 
tunglum, ‘‘they dwell now above the stars,’’ and with the accusa- 
tive to express motion, in a similar situation, as Matth. 27, 45, 
Waeron geworden Pystru ofer ealle eordan, ‘‘there was darkness 
over all the land.’’ Bufan (= be ufan ‘‘from above’’) is simi- 
larly used with the dative and accusative as Or. 20, 24, licgad 
bufan eordan on hyra husum, ‘‘they lie above ground in their 
houses,’’ Or. 106, 16, fonne tugon hie heora hraegl bufan cneow, 
‘*They drew their clothing above their knees.’’ Both these pre- 
positions appear in Early English, as Chauc. ©.T. 2045, over his 
head ther schyneth two figures, Alis. 3610, And of the sadil cast 
him, saun fale, Over his croupe and his hors taile, and Maundev. 
p. 298, Theise folk gon als wel undir the watir of the see, as thet 
dow above the land alle drye, Layamon III, 34, Ardur braeid heze 
sceld buuen his haelme. The compound a-bufan was not in use in 
Anglo-Saxon, but appears in Early English quite as often as the 
simple bufan, and becomes the regular form in Modern English, 
*bove occurring only as an abbreviation. Anglo-Saxon and English 
alone show two prepositions, over and above, for these closely asso- 
ciated ideas which in other languages are expressed as a rule by 
the one preposition. 

In Lithuanian the meaning of U7rép is given by the preposition 
corresponding etymologically to mepi, namely, pef, as per rubéziu 
eitt, ‘‘to go over the boundaries,’’ and also by secondary forma- 
tions, as in andpus wpés vaiskas sustdjo, ‘‘the host went over the 
river,’’ and by the locative of the noun virszis ‘‘that which is 
above,’’ as virszui 2@més dangus, ‘‘over the earth is the heaven,’’ 
ete. 

Old Bulgarian uses nadii, a secondary formation from na 
(=avd, ete. Cf. K. Vergl. Gr. §§580, 602), as Luke 4, 39, 
t stavit nadit neiya zapréti ognu, Kal émiotas érdvw avris érerip 
noev T@ TupeT@. This development from the meaning ‘‘upon”’ 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 23 


to that of ‘‘over, above,’’ is the reverse of what appears in some 
other languages (cf. p. 21 ftn.). For the meaning ‘‘over’’ given 
by éwt in Greek, but by ufar in Gothic, po (from *pos, K. Vergl. 
Gr. $613) is used, as Matth. 27, 45, tuéma bysttu po viser zema, 
OKOTOS éyeveTo eri Tacav THY YhV. 

In literary Greek vrép with the genitive expresses rest or move- 
mient over a place or situation, as Il. 2, 20, wep ceparrs orjvat, 
Aesch. Ag. 576, tirép Gardaoons kat yOovds rrotwpévors. With the 
accusative only motion over or above is suggested, as Od. 3, 73, 
aradrnoGe—ireip dda, with often the added idea of beyond, as 
Il. 5, 16, vrép dpov AvP axwxyn. The expression of simple ex- 
tension over or above by the use with the accusative is poetic 
and late. 


1. With the genitive. 


Ionic. Rev. d. Phil. 25, 166, 32 [350-325], «at érroixodopyoer 
tevylov virép yjs. Possibly the fragment Hoff. III, 95, 18 [4th 
cent. ], OmiaGe ris adds vrrép To . . . may belong here also. 

Heraclean. SGDI. 4629, I, 113 [4th cent.], wap 7ro avropov 
tov umép Ilavéocias ayovra. Almost the same phrase occurs in 
line 13. 

Megarian. SGDI. 3025, 17 [242-235], tov xopudoy tov vrrép 
Tas odov. Such expressions are frequent throughout this inscrip- 
tion. : 

Corinthian, SGDI. 3246, 6 [3rd or 2nd cent.], Atom @eodapou 
@EM vwrrép tod Kopefov. The phrase recurs in lines 8, 20, 29, 31. 
The meaning of @EM is probably Qua, in view of the late Greek 
use of this word for military divisions, and the fact that similar 
abbreviations occur in Attic (Wilhelm, Jahresb. d. Oesterr. Arch. 
Inst. d. Wien, 3, 46). 

Argive. SGDI. 3362, 46 [4th cent.], tas Cwpvas tas vrép Tov 
lepod Taptapdvte Kal tay yav. Another example occurs in line 36, 
and a fragmentary one in line 8. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 3758, 152 [2nd cent.], tod rapopifecOar tary 


XOpav vrép Tod dpovpiov ovO[é]v [elpynkdras. 


24 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


2. With the accusative. 
Megarian. SGDI. 3025, 15 [242-235], rov payw trov—irép 


Tav XKorAXrclav aro TOU padyios Tod brép TAav TVKorrelav. 

Elean. Ol. V, 46, 49 [189-167], opiop]os [7] Gs yopas tas 
vrép TO év .. . 

Rhodian. SGDI. 4110, 16 [4th or 83rd cent.], Qdwew dé tas 
orddas — play é irrép Td iotatdpiov. Another example is SGDI. 
3758, 163 [2nd cent.], Ta S€ drrép Tov Adhov—eipev IIpravéwr. 

The use with the genitive in the dialects is quite in accord with 
that of literary Greek. But the use with the accusative is parallel 
to the literary, poetic and late use of this case, for an idea of motion 
is present in none of the dialect instances. The late date of the 
examples in this scanty collection permits the assumption of 
influence by the «ow, to which this syntactic phenomenon is 
doubtless due. In Megarian the case use is quite indiscriminate: 
in the inscription from which the above examples are quoted, the 
genitive occurs eleven times and the accusative twice, in contexts 
that are absolutely parallel. The same careless use is seen with 
vmé, which appears in line 17 with the accusative and in 22 with 
the dative. 


B. Around. 
1. In general. 


The use of the cognates of audi/ is exceedingly limited. The 
early meaning ‘‘on both sides of’’ appears in the Sanskrit abhi- 
tas* with the accusative, as Cat.Br. 10, 6, 4, 1, etaw vd agvam 
mahimanavabhitah sambabhiwatuh, ‘‘these two Mahiman (cups) 
indeed came to be on both sides of the horse.’’ This is parallel 
to the meaning of the chiefly adverbial whhayatas, as R.V. 9, 86, 
6, ubhayatah pavamanasya ragmayah (pari yanti), ‘‘on both sides 


* Abhi, which at the first glance seems to be parallel to abhitas, comes instead 
from the Indo-European * abhi, * bhi, from which Latin ob (?), Gothic bi, Old High 
German bi (bz), and Old Bulgarian 0, obit are derived (K. Vergl. Gr. 22599, 601). 
This group of prepositions has the meaning ‘‘towards,’’ etc., and remains quite 
distinct from the derivatives of * ambhi, * mbhi, except in Gothic and Old Bulgarian 
(cf. pp. 26 and 40). 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 25 


of the wind the rays (go around),’’ with which may be compared 
the Lithanian abypusiat, abyszaliai, ‘‘on both sides of.’’ 

The later sense of ‘‘around’’ is the only one found in the Latin 
am, which appears only in archaic passages, as Cato, Orig. ap. 
Macr. 1, 14, 5, am terminum, Charis. 2, p. 205, am fines, am 
segetes, and has been completely crowded out by circum (cf. 
below) in independent use, although as a verbal prefix amb- ambi- 
it is common in all periods. 

Old High German wmbi has likewise only the meaning 
‘¢around,’’ occurring with the accusative, as tho gisah ther herlant 
managa menigi umbi sth, ‘‘the Savior saw a great company sitting 
around him.’’ This appears in Modern German in the form um, 
as Die Erde liuft um die Sonne, ete. 

Anglo-Saxon ymbe with the accusative is fairly common in the 
meaning ‘‘around,’’ as Mark 3, 32, and mycel menigu ymb hine 
saet, ‘‘and many men sat around him,’’ Matth. 3, 4, haefde— 
fellene gyrdel ymbe his lendenu, ‘‘had—a leathern girdle about 
his loins.’? The compound ymbeutan also occurs, as Levit. 3, 2, 
geotad fPaet blod ymbeutan paet weofud, ‘‘sprinkle the blood 
round about the altar.’’ In Early English this preposition gave 
way before abuten (aboute), as Mark 3, 32, and a company sat 
aboute hym, and embutan, etc., which was interchangeable in 
Anglo-Saxon with ymbe and ymbeutan. In Modern English there 
is no trace of it. 

The only language besides Old Persian showing the cognate of 
mepi in a prepositional use similar to that in Greek is Sanskrit.* 
It oceurs with the accusative, in the local meaning, as R.V. 3, 53, 8, 
mayah krnvanas tanvam pari svam, ‘‘creating shapes around his 
own body,’’ R.V. 1, 62, 8, sandd divam pari bhima virtipe— 
yuvati, ‘From of old the two unlike-maidens (go) around heaven 
and earth.’’ The derivative paritas is also used, with the accu- 
sative, as A.V. 10, 7, 38, tasmim chrayante ya uta ke ca deva 
vrksasya skandhah paritah iva ¢akhah, ‘‘ All the gods rest upon 


* Goth. fair-, OHG. fir-, OB. pré-, are verbal prefixes, Lat. per means ‘‘ through,” 
Lith. pe* means ‘‘through”’ or ‘‘over’’ (cf. p. 22). The Old Persian example of 
pariy, in a figurative use, is quoted p. 41. 


26 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


him, like the branches round upon the limbs of a tree,’’ and with 
the genitive, as R. 2, 87, 33, nigdém atisthat parito ’sya kevalam, 
‘‘nlaced only night around him.’’ The adverbial samantat (from 
sam--anta, ‘‘having the ends together’’) occurs with the genitive 
in this meaning, as Pafic. 185, tasya nyagrodhasya samantat 
paribhramati, ‘‘goes a circle around the banyan tree.’’ 

The place of audi and wepé in Greek is filled in Latin by the 
very common preposition curcum (ace. sg. of circus, ef. Kpixos, 
Early English hring) which is used with accusative, as Cic. Ac. 
2, 39, 123, terra circum axem se—convertit. Circa is used for 
circum, as Hor. Odes 1, 3, 10, all: robur et aes triplex circa pectus 
erat, but this occurs chiefly after the Augustan period. Curciter 
is very rarely used of place, as Plaut. Cist. 677, loca haec circiter 
excidit mihi (cista). Curca is seen in Romance, as Italian vol- 
geanst circa not, ete. In French autour de gives this sense, as 21 
va autour de la matson. This is like the use also of intorno in 
Italian and entorno in Spanish. 

In Gothie bz (cf. p. 24, ftn.) has taken on the meaning of 
*ambhi *mbhi to quite a large extent, besides the uses in which it 
corresponds in sense to eis and to éw/ and «ata with the accusative, 
and is equivalent in force to 7ep/, as Mark 3, 32, jah setun bi ina 
managei, Kat éxaOnto repi aitov dydos, Mark 1, 6, wasup fan 
Tohannes gawasifs—jah gairda filleina bi hup seinana, jv 6é 
"Iwavns évdedupévos—xai Savnv Sepyativny epi tiv oopvy avtod. 
This fusion of meaning in Gothic of the two prepositions which 
both exist in Old High German (umbz, bi) and Anglo-Saxon 
(ymbe, be, bi) shows that the lack of a Gothic equivalent in form 
of umbi, ymbe is not due merely to accident or to lack of material. 
In Anglo-Saxon beside ymbe and ymbeutan appear embutan, on- 
butan, abutan, from a (on, be) and utan (‘‘on [that which is] by 
[the] outside’’), as Levit. 1, 5, Aarones suna—offrion Paes celfes 
blod, and geoton embutan faet weofod, ‘‘ Aaron’s sons—shall offer 
the calf’s blood, and sprinkle it around about that altar,’’ Sax. 
Chr. 1083, fa wreccan munecas lagon onbutan Pam weofode, ** And 
the wretched monks lay round about the altar,’’ Sax. Chr. 806, 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 27 


an wunderlic trendel weard ateowed abutan daere sunnan, ‘‘A 
wonderful circle appeared around the sun.’’ In Early English 
only abuten (aboute, abeoten, ete.) remains, as Orm. 9229, Hiss 
.girrdell wass off shepess skin abutenn hiss lendess. This is 
strengthened by round, as Cov. Myst., p. 293, and so rownd abowth 
the place, and by all, as Alis. 1642, al aboute the riche town. 
Another English preposition, not in use in Anglo-Saxon, is around, 
*round (O. Fr. roond = Lat. rotundus), as Depos. of Rich. II, 
p- 23, that rewlers of rewmes around all the erthe were not yffoun- 
did, ete., and Cov. Myst., p. 110, I, mercy, have ronne the hevenly 
regyon rownde. In Modern English about and around are the 
two prepositions of this meaning which remain in use. 

In Lithuanian the meaning of around is expressed by apé with 
the accusative, as apé kakla uzriszt, is bind around the neck,’’ 
apé méstg eiti, ‘‘to go around the city.’? The derivative aplink 
also occurs, as Mark 3, 32, i zmones sedéjo aplimk 77, ‘‘ And men 
sat around him.’’ 

In Old Bulgarian o (cf. p. 24, ftn.) is used, as Mark 3, 32, 
i sedéase o nemi narodii, kat éxaOnto trepi avtov dydos. The form 
obu% does not occur in this meaning of ‘‘around.’’ The compound 
okristt. (from o-+-kristu, cf. Lith. skrytis, ‘‘the circumference of 
a wheel’’) has the same sense, as Matth. 8, 18, uziré ze Isustt 
minogy narody okristt sebe, tdwv &é 6 Incods roddovs Sydous rept 
avtov. A similar compound is okragii (cf. kragi, ‘‘circle’’). In 
Modern Russian okrestii and okolo give the same meaning. 

In literary Greek audi is used chiefly in poetry and in Ionic 
prose. Except in the common expression of audi twa, ete. (cf. 2, 
p- 29), the only Attic prose examples (except in Xenophon) are 
Thue. 7, 40, and Plato Menex. 242e. In its use with the dative, 
which is wholly poetic, the early meaning ‘‘on both sides of,”’ 
kept in many compounds as audiOadrarTos, etc., is still occasion- 
ally to be seen, as Il. 5, 723, although usually the only mean- 
ing is that of ‘‘around,’’ as Od. 12, 395, xpéa audi ofedois érrespav. 
With the genitive its use is rare and poetic, the one prose example 
being Hdt. 8, 104, audi tadrns tis medwos. The prose use is 


28 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


chiefly that of the accusative, which occurs in poetry as well, 
usually with the idea of motion, as Il. 2, 461, audi péeOpa rotavta. 

The common preposition in this sense is 7ep/, which is not only 
more frequent in the local sense, but has a wider development and 
use in general. With the genitive it is rare and poetic, as Od. 
5, 68, avtod terdvvoto epi orelovs yNadupoio. With the dative 
it is especially common in statements implying close contact, as 
Tl. 2, 416, yer@va epi ornbecot Saifa. This use with words 
describing clothing is especially frequent in Attic, and is often 
seen in the Attic inscriptions as well (Meisterh.* p. 220). The 
use with the accusative is common, as Od. 11, 42, o? wroAXoi rept 
Be@pov éfoirwv, Dem. 8, 3, Piruriros rept “EXAnorovTov wr. 

A summary of these uses in Greek and other languages is given 
briefly in the following table: 





























*ambhi, *mbbi 
: *peri Other Prepositions. 

on both sides around 
Sanskrit abhi-tas pari, paritas| samantat, etc. 
Latin am circum (circa, ete. ) 
Romance circa, cerca, ete. 
Gothic bi 
Old High German umbi 
Anglo-Saxon ymbe around, a-(on- em-) 

butan 
Early English around, abuten 
Lithuanian apé 
Old Bulgarian o, okrustii, okragii 
Greek (angi with (audi) mepi 
ative) 
a. api. 


Ionic. Mitth. 18, 269, no. 4, 1 [Hellenistic], audi dé tiufov 
. « « [Kyet] tos em’ aypotépas Sefuato xadov odod- The late date 
and the metrical form of this inscription render it valueless for 
any indication of the prose usage in Ionic. It may be merely lack 
of material that prevents any appearance in the [onic inscriptions 
of a use of audi comparable to that of Ionic prose literature (cf. 
above). But epé is fairly common, at an early date (cf. below 
and IV, 2, p. 45, ete.) so that no radical conjectures concerning 
wept are possible. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 29 


b. epi. 

Ionic. Hoff. III, 42, 30 [2nd half 5th cent.], t)ods [uw] (a) [evo- 
pévous] Aoveapevo[us] w[e]p[t w](a)[vra to](v) [ypeta vdar | (os) 
[x] ¥or xa[Oap]ovs eivar. Another example occurs CIGS. I, 411, 
6 [ca. 156]. 

Cyprian, SGDI. 60, 27, Raciredls Kas ad wrdds KaTéOijay Uv) 
Ta(v) Gov tay ’AGavav tay rep’ ’Hdanuov. 

Thessalian. Eph. Arch. 1901, 125, 29 [4th or 3rd cent.], «at 
vewo|u|évous Ta mepl Tov mupyov Tov UroK[a|Tw TH<t>s Muvins. 

Boeotian. SGDI. 737, 4 [1st half 2nd cent. ], €v wavti «| npd xij 
[o] wavo|o|eria[s] yevouevas rept [Tav yop|a[v. This is the re- 
storation of Gaheis, Wiener Studien 34, 280. 

Megarian. SGDI. 3052, 7 [end 3rd or beginning 2nd cent. ], 
xpnelaw Sé Kai Tax Trepi To tepo[v yopwr] Ta Sapociar. 

Corinthian. CIGP. et Ins. I, 426, 2 [end 3rd cent.], mpayyara 
Ta Tept avTOV OVTa. 

Argive. SGDI. 3339, 80 [2nd half 4th cent. |, oxevopdpos—eérret 
éyeveTo Trept TO Sexactddiov Katér[e|te. Of. also examples in line 
62 and in SGDI. 3340, 29 and 105 of the same date. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 3758, 98 [2nd cent.], tas mepl To Kapiov 
x@pas. Examples also occur in lines 127 and 132. 

Coan. SGDI. 3618, 9 [8rd cent.], dca] tas [«]a[Kxo] malas ras 
ryevomevas Trept avTovs. 

Cretan. Mus. It. III, 630, no. 52, 5 [late], tas yevouevas 
TepisTdatos Trept Tav mod Kal T[dov dor] S[a] pov. 

It will be seen that the dialect use is uniformly that of the accu- 
sative (except cf. 2 below). For the Cyprian example Hoffman 
(I, p. 73) suggests that the genitive is possible. But since such a 
use would be unusual for even literary Greek, it is especially im- 
probable in a dialect where the genitive is used so little as in 
Cyprian, since it is supplanted by the dative with this and other 
prepositions (cf. III, 1, b, p. 35, and ch. IV, I, 2, p. 71). 


2. Giving the eponymous officer. 


This subdivision is made for the purpose of comparison with the 
use of cvv and mera to give this idea. A table summarizing the 


30 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


occurrence of these four prepositions is given Ch. III, I, 2 a, 
p- 62. Latin shows a similar variation between cum and circum, 
with a preference for the latter. 


a. api. 

Argive. CIGP. et Ins. I, 554, 2 [5th cent.J], 4 7a]v Bwray 
t[ov] avd’ "Apicotwva 4 tav(s) cvvaptvovtas. Meister, I.F.Anz. 
I, 202, considers aplorwy the title of an officer of the Argive gov- 
erning body, reasoning that ot aud’ apiotwva is equivalent to 
of Sayudpyor (Et. M. 265, 45) = 00 dydonxovta (Thue. 5, 47) =a 
Bora cevtéepa (SGDI. 3277, 15). The usual interpretation is 
that ’Apiorwva is a proper name. This dialect seems to retain aupé 
in use more than the other dialects or Attic. In this example it is 
parallel to Attic use, but its appearance is the more interesting in 
view of the fact that it appears in prose in a figurative use also. 
Cf. IV, 1, db, p. 44. 


b. tept. 


Ionic. Rev. d. Phil. 36, 301, no. 2, 10 [4th cent.], avaypayrac 
Tous veotroias Tovs mept AiveoinAry. 

Arcadian. Michel, Recueil 190, 8 [8rd cent.], tos otpataryos 
ToS Trept UTpaTéav. 

Thessalian. SGDI. 1332, 30 [Roman], 76] wa [ém] merle] pa 
yevérBat [Tois tayois T]ois rép Pidddraov Evpe[veiov. 

Phocian. OIGS. III, 61, 22 [Roman], tov wept Pirova Lwor- 
Kpdtous kai Aduwva Zwiripov apydvrwv. 

Delphian. SGDI. 2502, 159 [336-826], & Bovdd arédaxe tol 
mept, MeAdvwrov. Similar expressions are frequent throughout 
this inscription, and occur also in SGDI. 2138, 1 [150-140]. 

Elean. Jahresh. d. Oesterr. Archaeol. Inst. in Wien I, 199, 8 
[middle 4th cent.], T@v mept Ilvppwva Sayidpyov. Other examples 
occur SGDI. 1172, 1 [1st half 8rd cent.], and Ol. V, 406, 407 
[both 1st cent.], 46, 14, 67 [189-167]. 

Laconian. SGDI. 4516, 9 [2nd or 1st cent.], érauvéoas épdpous 
tous mep IlacuréAn. Other examples are SGDI. 4544, 20 [195], 
Eph. Arch. 1900, 159, no. 2, 23, and probably also the fragment 
in SGDI. 4549, 6 [8rd cent. ]. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 31 


Megarian. SGDI. 3087, 34 [ea. 1st cent.], Tov wept Lavpaxor 
LKv0av vewrepiEdvTav. 

Argive. SGDI. 3364b, 5 [ca. 150], e0&e tots ratpuwtajis row 
_ me[pt] TloA[vp]vacrov. Other examples occur in lines 32, 35, 39.. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 3758, 70 [2nd cent.], ray wept tov Tvpavvov. 
This same phrase also occurs in lines 72, 78, 110 of the same 
inscription. 

Cretan. SGDI. 4940, 18 [late], eat xécpor trav rept PirdvBpo- 
tov Tov EvOupdye. | 

With the exception of Arcadian, none of these examples are 
especially early, and in most cases it can be suggested that the 
xowm influence may have something to do with the appearance of 
the usage. A different idiom is shown in Laconian SGDI. 4530, 
35 [1st half 2nd cent.], tol po] pou tol érl otpataya Fevodaveos, 
(also 4567, 33 [ca. Ist cent.]). Im Argive these examples show 
merely the crowding out by zepé of audi, the original and doubt- 
less normal dialect usage (cf. above). 


Il. Measure. 


The development to this sense in Sanskrit uwpari is shown by 
examples like R.V. 3, 54, 23, krodho mamapirvo dhairyasyopart 
vardhate, ‘‘fresh anger grows over (2. e., beyond) my forbear- 
ance,’’? and Kathas. 1, 16, 167, tam—devindém upari prasahya 
krtavan, ‘‘exalting her at one bound above his queens.’’ The 
same meaning is given by the use of pari as R.V. 2, 23, 17, vig- 
vebhyo a tua bhuvanebhyas pari tvastajanat, ‘‘the creator brought 
you forth with preference over all beings.’’ 

In Latin super occurs in this use, but is not frequent until after 
the Augustan period, as Quint. 11, 3, 169, swyer modum ac paene 
naturam. ‘The same usage is seen in Romance, as French beaux 
et jolis sur tous les compagnons, Italian mi preme sopra ogni altra 
cosa, Spanish me costo sobre cien reales. 

Gothie uses ufar, as Matth. 10, 37, saez frijoP attan aipPau 
aipein ufar mik, 6 dir@v tratépa 7 patépa brrép éué, and Old High 
German shows ubar in the same use, as thie thar minnot sun odo 


32 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


tohter ubar mih, ‘‘who ever loves son or daughter above me.’’ 
This remains in Modern German also, as Darum liebe ich dein 
Gebot iiber Gold, ete. Anglo-Saxon shows the same use of ofer, 
as Legg. Aelfred 2, ne lufa Pu odre fremde godas ofar me, ‘‘Do 
not love other strange gods more than me.’’ This is more fre- 
quent in Anglo-Saxon than in Early English, where above (which 
is not used in this sense in Anglo-Saxon) appears beside it. Ex- 
:amples of both are Alis. 6689, over alle men I the desire, and P. 
Ploughm. 5180, Do-best is above bothe, A bisshopes peer. The 
two prepositions appear together, as Seuyn Sages 1799, over alle 
bestes above, which usage is seen in Modern English over and 
above, ete. The Modern English use of beyond (AS. begeondan, 
Goth. jaind) does not occur in Early English, nor likewise that 
of past, which was not yet a preposition in Early English. 

In Lithuanian pef is used, as ta kvétka per mér gradi, ‘this 
flower is beautiful beyond all measure.’’ Old Bulgarian seems 
to express the idea without the aid of prepositions. In Luke 6, 
40, where Gothic has ufar, both Old Bulgarian and Greek use the 
comparative. In Matth. 10, 37, pace, equivalent in sense to 
paddXopr, is used, although the Greek here shows v7rép. 

In literary Greek this use of trép with the accusative is com- 
mon, as Xen. Cy. 1, 24, rots iwép Ta otpatetorpa ern yeyovdo.. It 
occurs sometimes in poetry with the genitive also, as Pind. Isthm. 
2, 36, dpyav Eevoxparns virep avOparwv yruKelav éoxev. Except in 
the common Attic and Herodotean expressions 7rept 1avTds, 7roddod, 
mrelovos, TAELTTOD, OAiyou Troveto Oat, Hryelo Bar, etc., the use of the 
genitive with wepé to give this idea is chiefly poetic, as Il. 5, 325, 
dy rept raons Tiev ounruxins. F. de Saussure suggests (Mém. 7, 
87) that zep/ in this use is different from 7ep/ meaning around, 
and is instead a variant form from *upert, which in such com- 
bination became either vrép mavtwy or Tept TavTwr. 


1. uzép. 
Laconian. SGDI. 4568, 40 [86], éyapicavto tau wéXeL ard TOD 
éperopevov ypnuatos Umrép yidlas Kal wevtakoclas Spaxypas. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. ae 


Rhodian. SGDI. 4320, 3 [2nd or 1st cent.], émeds [M]n[v0- 


Kp |etos—Sedapocrev[Ka]s etn Urrép Ta elKocL. 


2. qepl. 

Bocotian. SGDI. 489, 35 [end 3rd cent.], @AN améye wavra 
mepl TravTos Kn aTrodeddavOt TH ToL TD EyovTES TAS Opodoyias. 

Delphian. SGDI. 2677, 5 [189-8], «at wepi wrelorou mroveipe- 
vos Tav Trott Tous Geovs evoeBecav. The same phraseology occurs 
SGDI. 2682, 19 [140-100], and 2737, 5 [155]. 

Aetolian. SGDI. 1413, 7 [192-159], wept wdelorou rrovovpevos 
Tav Trott Tovs Geos evodBeaav. 

Argive. SGDI. 3417, 17 [82], adda zrep[t] a(A)elorou [srovov |- 
w[evos 76 ov] udépor trois mrod[ frais}. 

Rhodian.SGDI. 3752, 11 [2nd cent.], 6 Samos tav Te (7)o(tl) 
tou[s Oeors| evodBevav Trept mrelatou Trovovpevos. 

These examples of both t7rédp and 7repé are exactly parallel to the 
literary use, and their late date, together with the fact that in three 
of the dialects zepé occurs in the one phrase qepl 1r«laTou, is evi- 
dence for the assumption that they show merely «ov syntax. The 
Boeotian example of 7rep/ is somewhat different, the sense of 7rept 
mavTos apparently being ‘‘entirely,’’ and this may show an inde- 
pendent dialectic development. 


Ill. Iw Bewatr or. 


Sanskrit upari is not used in this sense, except perhaps in ex- 
amples like Pajic. 214, 6, anyath& tavopari prayopaveganam 
karisyama, ‘‘ Otherwise I shall sit and wait for death on your ac- 
count.’? Nor are uparistat, pari and paritas found in this use. 

Latin uses pro, as Hor. Od. 3, 2, 13, dulce et decorum est pro 
patria mori, Cie. Tuse. 4, 19, 438, Convenit dimicare pro legibus, 
which appears also in Romance, as French Melpomene et la gloire 
ont combattu pour mot, Italian andate la per me, Spanish asito por 
me companero. 

Gothic uses faur, as John 15, 13, maizein Pizar friabwai manna 
nt habaip, et hvas seiwala seina lagjiP faur frijonds seinans, 


34 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


peilova TavTns ayarnv ovdels eye, va Tis THY ~uyny adTod On brrép 
Tov didwv avTov. This remains in Old High German, as fure den 
singet er sus, ‘‘for him he sings sweetly.’’ Umbi is also used, as 
salig sint die umbi reht ahtunga leident, ‘‘ Blessed are they who 
suffer for righteousness’ sake.’’ These are seen in Modern Ger- 
man um, as Was thut man nicht um’s liebe Geld, and fiir, as Er 
hat viel fur mich gelitten. 

In Anglo-Saxon for is used, as John 15, 13, Naefd nan man 
maran lufe donne deos ys, daet hwa sylle his lif for his freondum, 
and this remains in Early English, as ib. No man hath more love 
than this, that ony man putteth his soule for his frendis. The 
phrase i behalf of, common in Modern English, does not appear 
in Anglo-Saxon, but from Anglo-Saxon behealfe ‘‘at the side of’’ 
Early English developed this use, with in, on and of prefixed, as 
Maundev. p. 225, commanded hem on Goddes behalve immortalle, 
Town. M. p. 73, of my behalf thou shalle hyr grete, Ipom. 1247, 
I the pray in my byhalfe that thou say. 

In Lithuanian wz is used, as jis uz mané kentéjo, ‘‘he suffered 
in my behalf.’’ This shows a development exactly the reverse 
of that in Greek and Teutonic, for w4 means ‘‘behind.’’ It gains 
the meaning ‘‘in behalf of, representing,’’ from the idea of stand- 
ing behind something or some one, in contrast thus to mpd ‘‘in 
front of,’’ and udp ‘‘over.’’ In Old Bulgarian za is used, as 
John 15, 13, bolisqa seyq libive niktoze (ne) imati, da kto dusa 
svoya polozitu za drugy svoye, pefova tavrns ayarny ovdeis ever, 
iva Tis THY Yuyny avTod On Urrép TaV didwv avTod. 

In literary Greek wpé has a limited use, as I]. 22, 110, ord Oar 
mpo mdAnos, Hdt. 7, 134, mpo ths Laraptns aroOvycKev, but, brép 
with the genitive is much more common, as Isoc. 4, 75, Tovs Tots 
cHpacw vrép THS ‘EXXados poKiwduvevoavTas. 


1. In general (v7rép). 


a. With the genitive. 
Ionic. AJArch. 1896, 189, no. 2, 14 [ca. 100], ouverérXe-— 


Ovclav—irep trav maldwv Kal Tov ébyBav. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 35 


Lesbian. SGDI. 255, 18 [late], ¢vra—ras te Ilodsados ADGyas 
TApPAaKeNeVaTAV UTEP TAS TOALOS. 

Thessalian. Hoff. II, 18, 25 [after 200], Nixaroup Mvacéaios 
umep “Adpodioias Aaipayelas TOLTE® amenevOepotcbav aro Aai- 
payor Pepouayetor TOs yivowevos Ta TOA KaT TOV Vdwov apyupioL oTa- 
Teipas Sexarreutre. 

Delphian. SGDI. 2520, 11 [231-230], tovs dé cepapvapo[ vas] 
—rTap éripéehevav Urrép avtav trove|icOa. 

Locrian. CIGS. III, 1064, 3 [3rd cent.], @y «ai “Apictapxos 
matpas trep aomid deipas dXeETO. 

Argive. CIGP. et Ins. I, 1485, 47 [4th cent.], tree Muppaxos 
wap “Adavada vrepapepiav arynuixe Aapodavns Iv0en iapot HHH. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 4262a, 39 [3rd cent. |, see ee 
hou (v)3ép<t> avrov Kal rav viev F. 

Calymnian. SGDI. 3590, 4 [ea. 205], «al dep trav viar v. 

Coan. SGDI. 3639, 10 [end 4th cent.], OQvovte] wep ras 
modos—[Ta]v tapewotvav. A less fragmentary example is 3624a, 
37 [190], AvoxrAjs AcwSduavtos cal inrép tod viod Hevotiwov XX. 

Cretan. SGDI. 5149, 15 [end 2nd cent.], drép dé rode TH— 
evypopw—atrootnravtray of te Kvovor—mperyeiav. 

Other examples occur in all the dialects quoted. This collection 
seems small because so many of the examples of this meaning are 
classified farther, and placed under following headings. 


b. With the datwe. 


Arcadian. Michel, Recueil 190, 3 [8rd cent.], avdpes ayaGot 
eyevovTo paxdpuevot trrép Ta TAS Td dLOS EdXevOepiat. On the equiva- 
lence of this dative to the genitive in the other dialects and literary 
Greek, cf. Ch. IV, I, 2, p. 71. 


c. With the accusative. 
Delphian. SGDI. 2615, 7 [270-260], aroreAvoOas 5é trav rodw 


aro Tav puctwy mdvrwv, dv érexdder Pir[ioti |wv virép trav ody 
atroteteixey vp’ Gv &pato éppvoidota brép tav méduv. Other ex- 
amples are 1409A, 11 [250-221] (with which ef. 2520, 11, quoted 
above under a), and 2642, 57 [158].. Examples are frequent. 


36 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Aetolian. CIGS. III, 485, 12 [8rd cent.], 7] vvevdoxetvtwy trrép 
Tap [| wdoduv. 

Laconian. SGDI. 4689, 68 [90], éor dé a det rapéyerv—irrép 
TOvS TpwTouvaTas apvas éxaToDv. 

Corinthian. 3195b, 2 [83rd cent.], . . . ot Sueactal Kal Kool 
evdoxov . . . Kal vrép Tay Tédy Tov ovy[Sixwov. .. . 

A similar usage is indicated for Phocian, Locrian, and Argive 
by the occurrence in these additional dialects of t7ép with the 
accusative expressing legal representation, a development of the 
general use of ‘‘in behalf of,’’ ef. 3, p. 89. The use of b7ép with 
the accusative in this sense of ‘‘in behalf of’’ does not occur in 
literary Greek. 


2. In dedications. 


This division is made in order to compare with v7rép the less 
common 7epé and mpd in this meaning. In the Attic inscriptions, — 
only udp occurs, as CIA. II, 3, 1440 [end 5th cent.], Ppvvar— 
virép Avoyyjorou Tov vod avéOnxev él Nixodnpov lepéws, and ib. 1485 
[end 4th cent.], evEdpevor vrrép Tay trader, ete. 


a. vmép 

Tonic. Hoff. III, 143, 1 [387-347], Ztparoxrrs varép tratpos 
tov éavtod Aevootpatov— Amorrwu Intpar avéOnxe. 

Boeotian. SGDI. 413, 10 [after 369], “Au]wvra[s]—xataBa[s 
év] t[0 a]v[tplov vrép avtos avT@ avéBexe . . . [¢] Katt. 

Phocian. CIGS. III, 130, 3 [4th cent.], Hooedaum— mérus 
evEapevn torcd aveOnxe usOdovs cwtynpas tbrép mpoyovwv te Kal 
avTav. 

Locrian. CIGS. III, 319, 1 [Roman], Aafre:pos ’A[ protorrei- 
ous vrrép Tov viod] avtobd ’Apiotor | eiBous. 

Argive. SGDI. 3339, 56 [2nd half 4th cent.], odtos AaBav— 
[xeneata] war’ avOduev tar Bedi eis *Enridavpov vrép av[ tov] ovK 
a[m|ediSov tadra. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 3824A, 5 [1st half 2nd cent. ], AanmvaE—irreép 
Tas yuvaixos Kal KXevrrdtpa cal @evpavera Aapwvaxtos vrép Tas 
Hatpos Oeois. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 37 


Theran. SGDI. 4706, 20 [end 3rd or beginning 2nd cent. ], 
kal Oduev Kal irrép adtod ws Kal brrép Tod TraTpos Kal Tod adeApod ToL 
Te avopiovtTa Kal TO Hparov. 

Coan. SGDI. 3722, 10 [ca. 240], “Apiotiov ’Apiotiwves — Kat 
Umrép Tov viod (A)atotpatou Kai vTrép Tas Ouyatpas Kretiov. 

Cretan. SGDI. 5062, 1 [4th cent.], AvroAA@mos vrrép Kadru- 
bayou ’Apréwd: Lwreipar. 

In all these dialects except Boeotian and Locrian there are other 
examples besides the ones quoted. 


b. epi. 


Cyprian. SGDI. 45, "Apuot@ywv 7 ’Ovaci( ja) tevEdpevos repi 
ma.ot Tau Ilepoevras wveOnxe. On the equivalence of this dative to 
the genitive in other dialects and literary Greek cf. Ch. IV, I, 
Sop TL: 

Thessalian, SGDI. 346 [ca. 200], Avrovdeos ovéOexe told] 
Tlored [a] mép rod mra[e]d[6]s Adrovdo[t. 

Coan. PH. 77 [Roman], watpq@o.[s wep]t ras Nexia rod [ ba]- 
pou viod. In Coan this late example of mepé and also PH. 78 and 
79 are parallel to PH. 77 and 80, which show exactly the same 
wording except that v7ép is used. This is doubtless due to the 
interchangeable use of the two prepositions to express reference at 
this time (Cf. IV, p. 44). 

The meaning of 7repé in these examples is not necessarily syn- 
onymous with that of udp in similar contexts, as intimated by 
Fick in his comment on the Thessalian example (SGDI. 346, 
notes: “7ép steht im Sinne von v7rép”). More accurately a paral- 
lel usage is indicated, the final idea being reached from a different 
starting point from that of trép. This use of 7epé is doubtless a 
development from the causal force of the preposition in expres- 
sions like Il. 12, 243, audveoOar mrepi watpys. Perhaps the middle 
ground between such a meaning and the simple idea of reference 
is shown in the following three examples: 


Lesbian. Hoff. II, 98 [1st part 2nd cent.], "AcxAarlw Larnpe 
Tepl vyelas. 


38 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Elean. SGDI. 1171 [4th cent.], Fanetwv rept duovoiap (cf. the 
simple genitive in Ol. V, 245). 

Corinthian. SGDI. 3184, 4 (=-1564)[?], "Esvcownra] ... 
ns “ApBpaxia[ ras] Audi Naox wat An[ovar] wept vyelas adtod [Kat] 
TOV UTapYOVTMD. 

The following table gives a chronological comparison of the 
occurrences of these two prepositions, showing also the one ex- 
ample of 7po in this sense (cf. Ch. I, III, 2, a, p. 19): 























unép trepi 76 
Tonic 387-347 
Cyprian early 
Thessalian ca. 200. 
Boeotian after 369 
Phocian 4th cent. 
Locrian Roman 
Heraclean ca. 4th cent. 
Argive 2nd half 4th cent. 
Rhodian Ist half 2nd cent. 
Theran end 3rd or begin- 
ning 2nd cent. 
Coan ca. 240 Roman 
Cretan 4th cent. 
3. In representation (v7ép). 
a. With the genitive. 
Boeotian. SGDI. 488, 52 [223-197], mwapeiay ovrép tas mo- 


A[e]os worduapyor Kadioddmpos.— Other examples occur in line 
97 and in SGDI. 482, 6 [end of 3rd cent. |. 

Phocian. OIGS. III, 119, 5 [4th cent.], cvvdiKe] oar dé [drep 
Pépnto|s éatw<u> a[8]ea. 

Delphian. SGDI. 1701, 8 [150-140], «vpva éotw avoavTay 
cudéovea Kai ddros 0 Oédwv vrrép Aopkidos. 

Laconian. SGDI. 4642, 6 [3rd cent.], mpooratevé[ rw] dé do- 
ors Ka ypyntne vrrép Ilerpatas ws édevOépas édcas. 

Coan. SGDI. 3636, 25 [end 4th cent. ], ayopeve: ob xa me 0 Bods, 
4) addos Urrép kyvov évde£.o[s. 


b. With the accusative. 


Phocian. SGDI. 1548a, 4 [1st part 2nd cent.], a) xarado[vru- 
Edotw—pnre adXos Urrép TovTous wnbels. 


f 


x - ) 
; 


OF Tt 


i UNIVER 


OF 
CALIFS: 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 39 


Delphian. SGDI. 1740, 5 [170], cvvevdoxdovtos rod viod Xtpa- 
tovixou Kal umrép “AyaboxAH Tod viod Zwirov. 

Locrian. SGDI. 1474, 5 [1st cent.], xecpeypadov Kprroda[ pol uv 
Awpobéou Aerpod vrép Zwripay Mevav[d]pov ’Audiccioa rapotcav 
kal Kehevovoa[y ypader|v brép avrav. 

Argive. SGDI. 3299, 2 [Roman], Kaddxparo[us] ’Apyela tov 
éavtas cup Blov (imr)ép Tay modu aperas évexa. 

Examples with the accusative are frequent in Phocian and Del- 
phian, and there are two others in Locrian and in Argive, but all 
of them unfortunately are of late date. A comparison of these 
examples of v7rép with those of avté denoting ‘‘instead of’? (with 
personal object), and of ape (cf. Ch. I, ITI, 1, pp. 16 ff, and 28, 
p- 19) indicates that the general dialect tendency is parallel to 
that of literary Greek in preferring vrép. (The use of the accusa- 
tive with vrép has been commented upon p. 36.) The three in- 
stances of avri are of the same date as those of v7ép in the same 
dialects, or later, and the Cretan instances of mp¢ show a usage to 
be expected from the retention in the same dialect of its parallel 
avtié in a use opposite to the usage in literary Greek (cf. Ch. I, 
III, pp. 13 f.). The following table summarizes these facts in 
briefer form: 














avri ™pd umép 
With?Gen. With Acc. 

Boeotian 223-197 
Phocian 4th cent. 1st part 2d cent. 
Delphian 173 150-140 170 
Locrian Ist cent. 
Laconian Roman 3rd cent. 
Argive Roman Roman 
Coan end 4th cent. 
Cretan 5th cent. 

















4. In a distributive sense, with words of payment. 
a. With impersonal object. 

Boeotian. SGDI. 802, 8 [in the younger alphabet], «7 Top 
mpocotatawy oBerov wrrép éx[atov Spaxyav, irép Tevraxatiay dpa- 
xpuav. This is the restoration of Haussoulier, Rev. d. Phil. 22, 
362. | 


40 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Rhodian. SGDI. 4110, 31 [4th or 3rd cent. ], e¢ 5é xa mpéRata 
éoBadrnl, atroTeicaTw vTrép éExactou mpoBaTou oBedXov oO éoBarov. 

This idea is expressed by avré in Arcadian, which shows an in- 
stance closely parallel to the above Rhodian example. Cf. Ch. I, 
III, 1, c, p. 18. A third method of giving this force is shown by 
the Heraclean use of wapd in SGDI. 4629, I, 121 [4th cent.], 
ai O€ Ka py TEpUTEVKWVTL KAT TA Yyeypappeva, KaTEdiKda Dev Trap meV TAY 
édaliav déca vowws apyupio Tap T6 duTov héxacTov, Tap 5é Tas duTreras 
dv0 uvas dpyupiw Tap Tav oxoivoyv hexactav. Cf. also lines 143 and 
172. The literary usage is that of xara, as Dem. 815, 11, «are 
Tas TéVTE Kal EiKooL was TrevTaKocias Spaypas elo dépery. 


b. With personal object. 
Cretan, SGDI. 4991, XI, 43 [middle 5th cent.], a[7]0ae de 


urép wlée|v te [ma]tpos Ta matpdia, v7e(d) dé Tas patpos Ta 
Hatpaia. The meaning of this is shown by the following free 
translation which includes some of the preceding sentences: ‘‘If 
a person dies in debt or with a lost case at law, if the heirs to whom 
the property falls are willing to assume the loss and the debt to 
the creditors, the heirs shall have the property. But if they are 
unwilling, the property shall belong to the winners of the suit or 
to the creditors, but the heirs shall suffer no other loss. And for 
the father’s (debts or loss) his property is to be mulcted, and for 
the mother’s likewise hers.’’ Elsewhere throughout the inscrip- 
tion, with other verbs of legal action, the simple genitive is used, 
as in IX, 31, I, 39, ete. (Cf. Baunack, Inschr. v. Gortyn, p. 85, 
for list of examples.) The force of v7ép is peculiar here, although 
there is no doubt about the sense of the passage. 


IV. REFERENCE. ~ 


The only parallels to Greek audi in this sense are found in 
Teutonic and Old Bulgarian. From a syntactic point of view 
Gothic bi may be included among the cognates of audi (cf. p. 26). 
This preposition is extremely common, as Luke 3, 15, Pagkjandam 
allaim—bi TIohannen, Staroy:fopevov travrav—rept tod "lwavvov. 
Old High German wmbi is used in the same sense, as in haubide 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 41 


dhes libelles ist chiseriban umbi mih, ‘‘In the beginning of this 
book is written about me.’’ In Modern German it is common, in 
the form um, as um etwas wissen, ete. In Anglo-Saxon ymbe 
occurs, as Beow. 353, wc—frinan wille—ymb fPinne sid, ‘‘1 will 
ask concerning your expedition.’’ The compound ymbutan is not 
used in this sense in Anglo-Saxon, but occurs in Early English, as 
Met. 8, 14, hi ne gesawon sundbuende, ne ymbutan hi ne herdon, 
‘‘they did not see the sound-dwellers nor did they hear about 
them.’’ Corresponding to Gothic 61 Anglo-Saxon also shows be, 
as Luke 3, 15, eallum on hyra heortan Pencendum be Johanne, 
‘all men mused in their hearts of John,’’ and likewise Early 
English, as P. Ploughm. 9197, so I seye by yow riche. There is 
but little trace of this use in Modern English. An example is 
Merch. of Ven. 1, 2, How say you by the French lord. The com- 
pound aboute does not occur in Anglo-Saxon. Its first appearance 
in Early English is in 1230, as Ancren Riwle 344, Hu hire stout 
abuten vleschliche tentaciuns, and becomes one of the commonest 
prepositions to give this meaning in Modern English. 

Old Bulgarian uses for this meaning 0, which may also be con- 
sidered here (cf. p. 24, ftn.). An example is Luke 3, 15, pomys- 
lyeyastemt visyemi—o Joanye, StaroySopevwr ravtrov — rept Tod 
*"Iwdvvov. In Russian secondary formations are used, but in Bo- 
hemian o with the locative still gives this meaning. 

Although Sanskrit does not show pari in this sense, the one 
instance of the word in Old Persian is in such a meaning, namely, 
Bh. I, 54, naiy adarsnaus cisciy Pastanaiy parity Gaumatam, ‘‘no 
one dared to say anything about Gaumata.’’ Latin circa, the 
syntactic equivalent of wep/, is frequent in post-Augustan prose, as 
Quint. 10, 5, 5, circa eosdem sensus certamen. This use persists 
in the Romance languages, as Italian circa il noto affare, Spanish 
acerca de esta circumstancia (beside the later expressions, Italian 
intorno, Spanish en torno, al rededor), Ptg. acerca, ao redor, em 
torno, and French autour de. 

Sanskrit wpart is used in this meaning, as Hitop. p. 73, 18, 
ayam svami tavopari vikrtabuddhi, ‘‘that master being of altered 
mind about you.’’ Judging from the use and meaning in Latin, 


42 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Romance and Germanic of the cognates of this preposition (cf. 
below), it may be assumed that the idea of reference developed 
from the meaning ‘‘over, upon,’’ rather than that of ‘‘above.’’ 
Additional evidence for this assumption may be given by the fact 
that Gothic ufar which means ‘‘over, above,’’ but not ‘‘upon,’’ 
is not used in the meaning ‘‘concerning,’’ while ana, meaning 
‘‘upon,’’ is thus used. 

Latin super to express reference belongs at first to colloquial 
language only, being entirely avoided by Caesar, and occurring in 
Cicero only in the letters. Later it becomes frequent. In this 
sense it is always used with the ablative (in contrast to the use 
of the accusative in the local meaning, cf. p. 20). An example 
is Cic. Att. 16, 6, 1, hac super re scribam ad te Rhegio. In the 
Romance languages this becomes one of the most common preposi- 
tions for this meaning, as Italian parleremo sopra ’1 vostre affare, 
French ils disputent sur telle question, and Spanish disputarse 
sobre una cose. , 

The use of the preposition in Old High German is shown by 
lukkiu urchunde uber mith ze sagenne, ‘‘to speak false testimony 
about me.’’ In Modern German iiber is the commonest preposi- 
tion to give this meaning, as iiber etwas sprechen, ete. In Anglo- 
Saxon ofer is rarely used in this sense. An example is Luke 19, 
41, hi veop ofer hig, ‘‘he wept over it.’? No instance seems to 
be available from Early English, but in Modern English its use 
is fairly common. 

An instance of the use of a preposition of totally different 
origin from the three Greek ones under consideration is shown by 
Lithuanian, where apé is the regular preposition, as Mark 1, 30, 
if tojatis jam ape 7G pasiké. Sometimes w4 is less correctly used, 
as nesirupink 4 mané *‘ grieve not about me.’” 

This is more striking in Latin, where Reference is most com- 
monly expressed by de, as Cic. Lael. 1, 1, multa narrare de Laelio. 
This is shown also in the Romance languages, as Italian pensare, 
guudicare,dt una cosa, Spanish pensar, disputar de una cose, 
French parler, discourir d’ une chose. This is the only instance 
in which a preposition of altogether different original force is — 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 43 


conspicuously preferred to the words meaning ‘‘around, over,’’ 
which exist beside it and are also used to give the idea of refer- 
ence. In de the starting point is what is emphasized. Before 
stating the Greek usage in regard to audi, wept and vrép, it may 
be of interest to contrast with the parallel prepositional uses of 
their equivalents in other languages the expression of reference 
by other prepositions of different original meaning. This can be 
most briefly suggested by the following table in which the preposi- 
tions are arranged according to their literal meaning, so as to show 
the line of development to this figurative sense: 
































around over upon towards from | behind 
Greek audi Tepi imép | (émi) |(eic, rpédc) 
Sanskrit (OP. |upari| adhi abhi 
pariy ) 
Latin circa | super ad de 
Romance circa, | sobra, de, di 
cerca sur 
Gothic bi ana (du) 
O. H. German umbi ubar fona 
Mod. German um tiber | (an) von 
Anglo-Saxon ymbe, be ofer | on, upon 
Early English | ymbutan, be on, upon of 
Mod. English | about, (by) ma over |on, upon | (anent)| of 
Lithuanian apé az 
Old Bulgarian o 





In literary Greek aydé is as limited in this use as in the local 
meaning. With the genitive it is almost wholly poetic, occurring 
once in Herodotus, 6, 31, audi xpicios Tév prnoThpwv TocadTa 
éyévero, and in Homer but once, Od. 8, 267, audt girorHros aeidevv. 
In Pindar and Euripides it is more frequent. With the dative it 
is commoner, as Hdt. 8, 32, audi T@ OavaT@ avris dfs Aéyerac 
Aoyos, and with the accusative also, as Aesch. Suppl. 246, etpnxas 
audl kdopov arpevdh Adyov, and the formulas auqi pol adre, ava€, 
ete., used by the dithyrambic poets. | 

The usual preposition for this meaning is wep It occurs with 
the dative with words denoting care, anxiety, etc., so that it ap- 
proaches a causal force, as Il. 10, 240, eddecev Sé rept EavO@ Meve- 
Ad@, Thue. 1, 60, Seicas mrepi ta yop». With the genitive it is 
very common, as Thuc. 4, 22, Aéyew Kal axove mepi Tivos, and 


44 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


often becomes a mere periphrasis, as Plato Ap. 19¢, e¢ tus epi Tav 
ToovTay copes eatt. From the use with the accusative to express 
literal or figurative occupation near or around some object, as the 
Homeric wept ddépra mroveiobat and Attic aperads eyeiv mepl te 
(rwva), etc., the idea of reference in general arose, as Xen. An. 3, 
2, 20, duapravew repi tiva, Plato Crit. 50d, of vdépor of rept rods 
yapuous. This less immediate meaning of reference is however 
often given by the use of the genitive as well, and the difference 
is but slight. Cf. Plato Euthyphro 3b, «acvotopetv mrepi ta Oeia 
and 5a, Kawvoropely rept trav Oelwv. In the Attic inscriptions 7rept 
with the accusative interchanges with es and pds in such expres- 
sions as in CIA. IT, 581 [320], grrotiplas rhs mepi thy Tavvyiba 
THs TWept Tos Beovs. The use of trdp to express reference is a 
development from its meaning of ‘‘in behalf of, in the interest 
of,’’ ete., and in good Attic prose it is not so colorless as epi 
but retains to some extent the idea of interest (K.-Bl.? $435). 
It is most common in the orators, as Dem. 6, 35, ma mepi Ta 
Sixatwov pnd’ irrép trav Ew zpaypatwv elvar tHv BovrAnv, arr trrép 
TaY €v TH yopa. A Homeric example is Il. 6, 524, trép Bev 
aicxye axovw. In the Attic inscriptions (Meisterh.? p. 222) the 
confusion in use with 7epé with the genitive became general after 
about 300, as CIA. 33, 307, 5 [290], wept dv amrayyédre 0 aywvo- 
Oérns irép TOV Ovolav. 
1. dpi. 
a. With the datwe. 


Cretan. SGDI. 4991, I, 17 [middle 5th cent.], ac dé«’ avdi 
SHrar porlwvt. pwviovtes ov Fexatepos Huev. The reason for this 
case use may lie in the fact that this is the only example in which 
the preposition has a personal object. Cf. ib. I, 2, ds «’ édevOépan 
} Soro pérAre avdiponrev. 


b. With the accusative. 


Argive. CIGP. et Ins. I, 557, 7 [ca. 3rd cent. ], “AXvalas €] Soke 
terei[ar] é[v rae tod Avxelov repéver| wn[S]’ tr[v]everOar—apdi 
70 ToD Auxei[ov . . . of otpatay]jol Kpirw[y... 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 45 


Cretan, SGDI. 4991, VI, 26—IX, 19 [middle 5th cent.], 
at dé kK O ayTipwdos aTropwrAnL avdl TO yphos di K’ dvdiporiwvTe. 
Similar expressions occur also in V, 46, VI, 52, 4998, IV, 16 
[middle 5th cent.], and 5044, 24 [ca. 280]. Except for the ex- 
ample in Argive to give the eponymous officer (cf. I, B, 2, a, p. 
30) these are the only instances in the dialects of aud/, which 
gave way before mepé here as in literary Greek. The example 
from Argive is interesting, as being almost a century later than 
the earliest instance of vep/ in this sense. Cf. the table of audi 
and v7rép, p. 50. 

2. Tepl. 


a. With the genitwe. 
Tonic. Hoff. III, 105B, 24 [ca. 475], dorus—H [te «]axov 


Bovrevor rept T [ni | wv tod Evvod eidas—amrdrAdvo Gat. 

Lesbian. SGDI. 281A, 16 [333], xpiva[e wlév adrov xpirra 
wadhioe opocavtas tep[t] Gavaro. 

Thessalian. Hoff. IJ, 70, 3 [6th or 5th cent.], ad(A)’ ade rep 
yas tacde TroX(A)dv apiotedov eave. 

Boeotian. CIGS. I, 3054, 8 [Roman], couvwpo[doyelcar] to 
Tept Tov Saverw . . .—[Kabds a 1rd] us Trepl obTaY eadirraro. 

Phocian. SGDI. 1547, 8 [2nd cent.], wept dé Tav mporepov 
adeipé[vov éde] v0épwv—a avTa Capia éorw. 

Delphian. SGDI. 2561A, 4 [1st half 4th cent.], taye[v]céw 
&:[xalws K]ata rodv vouous—xal Tois—rép Tov ’Amredalov. 

Aetolian. SGDI. 1411, 7 [ca. 193], Ta padpiopata—repi 
Tavtav Tov d:ravOpwrwv KaTapova eipev. 

Elean. SGDI. 1149, 4 [ca. 500], cuvday x’ ad(A)arAos Ta 7 
G(A)a Kal Tap Trodduo. 

Laconian. SGDI. 4430, 2 [221], re@odov rromncapévov Aapiovos 
—zept mpokevias. 

Megarian. SGDI. 3025, 3 [242-235],«ara rdde éxpivay tol 
Meyapeis—rrep) tas yopas as auherréyov kal [rep ]t Tod VeAravvo[v. 

Corinthian. SGDI. 3175, 2 [later than the early inscriptions], 
ds mepl Tas abtov yas Oave Bapvapevos. 

Argive. SGDI. 3340, 116 [2nd half 4th cent.], aira rept 


matoav éveabevdO [ovuca €VUTTVLOV ELOE. 


46 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Rhodian. SGDI. 3749, 5 [ca. 220], ouveveyxeiy ‘Podiuis Ka 
‘leparrutvios Ta Sd€avta trepi Tas ouppayias. 

Calymnian, SGDI. 3591a, 41 [2nd or Ist cent.], «ai ra 
adda [ravta] rowvvtw Toi mpootdtat Tepi Tav éypapTupLar. 

Coan, SGDI. 3620, 2 [Roman], epi av ‘AXKapvacceis— 
[a&]vobvre Soper avrois avaydpevow. 

Cretan, SGDI. 5125A, 11 [after middle 5th cent.], wept dé 
TO puoT@ at hwov[io?... 

Examples are numerous in all the dialects quoted except Boeo- 
tian. 


b. With the dative. 
Arcadian. Inschr. v. Magnesia 38, 46 [ca. 207], of vouoypado. 


—erideEdvrov Tas Tore, ws of ToAlTaL Bovrcto(o)vTat Trepl Tow. 

Cf. the use of the dative here with that with a7é and é«, Ch. 
IV, I, 2, p. 71. An example of partial encroachment upon this 
by the genitive usage of the «ov is shown in line 8 of the same 
inscription, Kat aroddvrwv — kai rept Tav AOLTOY TavT@Y Siarex- 
Géoct. The dative participle is anacoluthic, agreeing logically 
with arodévrwv, and wavow must be taken with trav Aordv. 


c. With the accusative. 


Ionic. Hoff. III, 96, 4 [357], eet avip ayabos [éyevero wept 
Thy Tomy THY ’Epul pai | wv. 

Arcadian. SGDI. 1222, 32 [Pre-Roman], «& [0] dv m[s] ... 
ienro. TOV Trept Ta Epya ov . . . KaT et O€ TL. 

Lesbian. SGDI. 304A, 17 [319], éyéver]o dé Kal rept rap 
atodelay avn[p ayabos. 

Cf. also ib. 311, 26 [Roman], éraivnv AaBéwva traicas éovta 
teluas akvov Kal dia Tav Nolo peév repli Tov Biov cepvorata. 

Phocian. SGDI. 1552a, 17 [ca. 3rd cent.], tapaxareiy avrov— 
[—ayaOo]v yivecOar—[repi tovs rodéras. (Only restored ex- 
amples occur. ) 

Delphian, SGDI. 2820, 2 [170-157], avnp ayabos éori epi 
Tav TOM Tov Aeddar. | 

Laconian. SGDI. 4544, 6 [195], o7rovddas cal dirotiulas over 
edrelrrwv Tepl macav yxpelav (dv) Tuyxdve Tis Exwv. 





IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 47 


Corinthian. SGDI. 3195b, 8 [3rd cent.], avadkopatwy avuro- 
Sixov . . . Tnplov & epi tav Kopyupé| av? 

Argive. CIGP. et Ins. I, 784, 4 [869], aducopevos és Tpolava 
mepl Te Tay cwrnplav Tas ywopas ayabos éort. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 4154, 44 [8rd cent.], dvdpes ayabot éyévovto 
mepl Ta lepa Ta Atvdiov. 

Calymnian. SGDI. 3585, 24 [4th cent.], edvolas av éywv dvate- 
Ae arept to 7A[HO0s TOV Kad] vaviovr. 

Coan. SGDI. 3613, 4 [8rd cent.], avnp ayabds éore rept Tov 
Sadpov tov Kevor. 

Cretan. SGDI. 5058, 32 [8rd cent.], rlovs vowous «[ai xa] 
twas addous totepoy Oew[ pw] eOa 7 we[pi ra Biva] 4 xepl Ta mor- 
[ere] ea. 

There are other examples in all the dialects quoted. This usage 
is quite parallel to that of wepé with the accusative in literary 
Greek and especially in the Attic inscriptions, for the same varia- 
tion between rept, ets and mpds referred to above occurs throughout 
the dialects also. (Sometimes the idea is expressed by the dative 
without a preposition, e.g., Phocian CIGS. III, 223, 3.) A 
very forced instance is seen in Lesbian, in the second example 
given above. The example from Delphian shows the regular 
phrase in the manumission decrees in referring to the death of 
the master. 

3. orép. 

Ionic. CIGS. I, 314, 2 [1st part 83rd cent.], «at Aéyov Kai 
mpattov [t]a cupdépovta vrép THs Toews. 

Lesbian. SGDI. 2810, 11 [306], 6 Bacireus ’AXdEavdpos— 
m[pooér jake [’Epe] oto xpivae irrép te [’Ayo]virm[o x]at [ Kvpuc- 
tAd] ow. } 

Boeotian. SGDI. 488, 120 [223-197], tdv re ovvypadov, av 
é[dw]xav obrrép [0 ]itav tav ype ator. 

Phocian. OIGS. III, 98, 6 [after 196], dxép d€ ray ardor 
amdvt[ov Ta vouipa tedAn A]auBavew Bowtovs cal Doxels trap’ 
Q@XAn[A@v .. . 

Delphian. SGDI. 2506, 37 [277], Ore av éyovre [ayabov rpa- 


o| ce UTép THY Trepl TOV Aovucov T[ exviTav. 


48 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Locrian. SGDI. 1502, 10 [2nd cent.], mpdvoray é[2ro1] joavro 
kata Kowov T[a]v apiotav irép Tas cvvddov tev [TE] yuTar. 

Elean. Ol. V, 47, 21 [after 164], T[a@ dpt]a ra re[O] é[vra] imép 
Tav xpilot lop pévy Kxipra—yeyev[nué|vas xal wpdte[p]ov Kpicvos 
—[v7é]p tav[tas Ta]s yopas irép ds [viv diadepovtar] . . . 

Laconian. SGDI. 4568, 6 [86], ozovdas nal didrotipias odbev 
évrelrrovtes UTrép Gv Kkal—a modks—avtors éxdopunoev Tipmais. 

Megarian. SGDI. 3010, 17 [306], trols ayaOdv 7 mpaccovtas 4 
Aoyar 7 Epyw brrép Tas TOALOS. 

Argive. SGDI. 3339, 41 [2nd half 4th cent.], ais dpwvos 
(¢)[xéras api |Kero eis 76 iapov trép dwvas. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 4254, 9 [211], vrép mpokevias Anuntpiw Aco- 
ddrov Lupaxociw. This concludes the prefatory sentence of an 
honorific decree. 

Theran. SGDI. 4706, 255 [end 8rd or beginning 2nd cent. ], 
TavTa Kuvpia éotw, Trav Urrép Siadvoews: Urép Sé TovTOU pi exyéTw 
éEovciav uneis. | 
~ Calymnian, SGDI. 3585, 20 [ca. 4th cent.], «al Aéyew Kal 
Tpaccew Ta Séovta bmrép Tod [wAHOov](s T)od Karupviov. 

Coan. Mitth. 23, 447, no. 1, 4 [middle 3rd cent.], brép oy «ali 
Blacirets [IIto]Xepaios Sypare irrép aitod é[v é]murords [a]v 
ereppe—irrép Tas Ouai[as. 

Cretan, SGDI. 5040, 57 [2nd cent. ], dep 5 trav mpoyeyovdrwy 
—adicnuatov—roinodcbwv tav SeEaywryav oi —Kdopot. 

Examples are numerous in all the dialects quoted. A compari- 
son of the examples of udp with those of wepé with the genitive 
shows the same conflict to exist which appears in the Attic inscrip- 
tions. The tendency in each dialect is a general one, not at all 
due to the use of one or the other preposition with any particular 
phrase.* For the dialects as a whole, the same statement may be 


* For example, tpeoBeiw and related words occur with 7epi in three dialects, Les- 
bian Hoff. II, 121, 6 [2d half 3d cent.], Boeotian BCH. 19, 314, no. 1, 24 [after 3d 
cent. ], and Cretan Mon. Ant. I, 45C, 29 [ca. 183]. The same words are found with 
irép in inscriptions from Arcadia, BCH. 20, 124, no. 2, 283, Thessaly BCH. 13, 379, 
no. 2, 14, Boeotia BCH. 19, 314, no. 1, II, 25, and in Argive SGDI. 3290, 21, all 
of Roman times. An examination of the use with words of speaking and of judg- 
ing shows the same results. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 49 


made which Meisterhans gives in regard to Attic, namely, that the 
earliest instances of vrép = epi occur about 300 (cf. Lesbian, 
Megarian, Calymnian, above). Thereafter this use becomes more 
and more common. In the latter examples the influence of the 
kowy was undoubtedly a factor. Since there are no instances of 
vmép in this use at a time earlier than that in which such an Attic 
use of it existed, it is idle to consider whether the force might have 
developed in the dialects from any other meaning of wrép than 
that of ‘‘in behalf of,’’ from which it arose in literary Greek. 
(Cf. Sanskrit, Latin, Anglo-Saxon, etc., above.) As long as there 
is no evidence to the contrary, its origin may be assumed to have 
been the same in the dialects as in literary Greek and the Attic 
inscriptions. 

There is but little of interest to note in regard to the individual 
dialects. The preference for wepé (in all uses) in Lesbian, re- 
marked upon by Ahrens p. 151 (and reiterated by Pomtow, Jhb. 
f. Phil. 127, 324), with evidence from the literature, is not seen 
in the inscriptions, the date of the earliest example of wép 
in this use being earlier than that of mep/, and the preponderance 
of examples being also in favor of vmép. (In other uses vrép 
occurs once, in a late example expressing ‘‘ in the interest 
of,’’ and zrepé occurs once, in a dedication, which seems to be the 
sole instance in support of Ahrens’ statement. Cf. pp. 35, 
37). There is but one late example of zrepé in Boeotian, but trép 
is frequent. This assumption of a definite preference for Umép 
in this dialect accords with the appearance of vrép earlier than 
mept in a Megarian inscription whose orthographic peculiarities 
Bechtel accounts for by suggesting Boeotian influence (SGDI. 
3010). If this suggestion is correct, a syntactic influence may 
then be thought of also, as one reason for this Megarian use of 
vrrép. 

The following table summarizes for each dialect the facts given 
above: 


50 


SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 




















api mepi Umép 
Ionic ca. 475 Ist part 3rd cent. 
Arcadian ca. 207 (with dative) 
Lesbian middle 2nd cent. 306 
Thessalian 6th or 5th cent. 
Boeotian Roman 223-197 
Phocian 2nd cent. after 196 
Delphian Ist half 4th cent. 277 
Aetolian ca. 193 
‘Locrian 2d cent 
lean ca. 500 after 164 
Laconian yak 86 
Megarian 242-235 306 
Corinthian Later than the early 
inscriptions 
Argive ca. 3rd cent. 2nd half 4th cent. | 2d half 4th cent. 
Rhodian ca. 220 211 
Theran 2nd or Ist cent. end 3rd or begin- 
ning 2nd cent. 

Calymnian ca. 4th cent. 

n Roman middle 3rd cent. 
Cretan middle 5th cent. | after middledth cent.| 2nd cent. 





CHAPTER Itt. 
avy, peta, Tedd. 


Cognates: 1. ovy (Evv). No certain cognates. But cf. below. 
2. wera. Goth. miP, OHG. mit, As. mid. 
3. weda. Arm. yet, Lett. péz. 

The principal other sociative prepositions are: 

1. (*som, etc.) Skt. sam-, sa- (prefix only), saha (Av. hada, 
OP. hada), samam, smat, etc., OB. sq- (prefix only), si, stin-. 

Lith. and Lett. sa- (prefix only), OPr. sen, Grk. dua, ouod are 
related. The phonetic connection of Lith. sx, Lett. su with this 
group is not clear. They are placed by some (Kretschmer, KZ. 
31, 416) with Greek ovv, with the addition also of OB. si. But 
the latter can come without difficulty from *som. 

2. (*ko, *kom) Lat. con- (prefix only), cum (Osc.-Umbr. com), 
O. Ir. con, co. Gothic shows a trace of this in handugs ‘‘ wise,’’ 
from *kom-dho. Of. perhaps also Grk. xowdos from *komios. 

In connection with the syntactic rivalry between ovv and pera 
it is of interest to note some instances from other languages where 
the regular sociative preposition has been encroached upon or even 
driven out entirely by another preposition not originally sociative. 
In Latin poetry and post-Augustan prose simul is used in place of 
cum. This doubtless arose from the use of simul cum = una cum, 
as Plaut. Amph. 754, gui—istanec tecum conspicio svmul, ete., but 
it has made no serious inroad upon cum, which is still the usual 
sociative preposition in all the Romance languages except French, 
where it remains only in composition. The beginning of its dis- 
appearance here may be traced back to Gallic Latin, in which the 
use of apud for con appears as early as Sulpicius Severus (ca. 365— 
425 A. D.), as Vita Martini 23, Angelos apud se loqut solere 
dicebat (Geyer, Archiv. fiir Lat. Lex. II, 26ff.). That apud 
really has the sense of cum here, and not that of coram as in Latin 
ef. Ch. I, p. 5), is shown by the use of cum with loqut in similar 

51 


52 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


phrases by the same writer, as Dial. 1, 25, cum iste angela loque- 
bantur, ete. The conflict between the two prepositions resulted 
finally in Old French in the victory of apud, which became od, 
from *avod, *aod. At the same time the adverb avuec (avoec, 
ete.), from original apud + hoc was in use, and this assumed the 
role of od, an example from the eleventh century being Ch. d. Rol. 
XIII, avoec we plus de cinquante chars, and superseded it so 
entirely that avec appears as the regular sociative preposition in 
Modern French. 

In Anglo-Saxon accompaniment was expressed by mid, whose 
cognates are still in use in other Germanic languages. But wip 
(Goth. wif-ra, OHG. widar) ‘‘against, towards,’’ was parallel 
in use to mid in expressions like ‘‘ fight, contend against (with), 
be friendly towards (with), speak to (with),’’ ete. Again, since 
the step in meaning from ‘‘opposite, against’’ to ‘‘beside’’ was 
an early one, wif came to be used with personal objects in the 
sense of apud, thus showing another parallelism to mid, which had 
gained the force of apud through its meaning ‘‘among’’ (cf. the 
reverse use of apud for cum in Latin above). From such asso- 
ciations the idea of accompaniment arose gradually in wif, as 
C. P. 352, 4, cydde daet he nolde habban nane gemodsumnesse 
wif da yfelan, ‘‘ announced that he would have no association with 
the wicked.’’ This meaning was limited to the use with the 
dative and accusative, although in the sense of ‘‘against’’ uP 
occurs with the genitive and instrumental as well as with the two 
former cases. In Early English wif became quite as common a 
sociative preposition as mid. The variation in use was due chiefly 
to locality and dialect, the north and east losing mid as early as 
1200, but other regions showing both words in use, wif having 
also at times an instrumental sense, in which use the loss of mid 
was hastened by the encroachment upon it of durh and of by. 
Examples from the fourteenth century are R. of Gl. p. 17, mid 
hym he hadde a stronge axe, but P. Ploughm. 1398, gaf hem 
rynges with rubies. In Modern English wif has gained the 
mastery so completely as to become the only sociative preposition. 
The sole trace of mid is to be seen in the compound midwife. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 53 


The use of ovv and mera in literary Greek has been made the 
subject of careful study by Tycho Mommsen in Beitrage zu der 
Lehre von Griechische Pripositionen.* His point of view is 
stylistic throughout, the main thesis being that the use of ov 
is poetic, and that of mera a prose characteristic. It is shown by 
convincing statistics that in Attic prose writers except Xenophon 
ovv is very rare in comparison with meta (Thue. 34: 401, Iso- 
erates 0: 216, Plato 29: 509, Demosthenes 12: 266, Aristophanes 
9: 330, ete. Cf. p. 356), and is almost altogether limited as fol- 
lows: It occurs in stereotyped phrases like ovv Oe@, (e. g., Plato 
Thaeat. 151b), ovv odors, (e. g., Thuc. 2, 90, 6), etc., which may 
be differentiated from a general sociative use by the fact that they 
express helpful accompaniment, as nearly as the meaning can be 
defined. A parallel to this is to be seen in the Lithuanian sw 
dévu and st dé, equivalent to English ‘‘Goodbye.’’ Cf. also the 
German Geh mit Gott, etc. The Latin equivalent is rather the 
inscriptional quod bene felix faustumque sit, but cum is also used, 
as Cato R.R. 141, 1, cum dwis volentibus quoque bene evenat, 
and the use remains in Italian, as va con buona ventura, or state 
col buono di. Secondly, it occurs in phrases standing in close 
attachment to a noun, and indicating a closely related but usually 
subordinate object, as Thue. 5, 74, 3, (aré@avov) cal ’A@nvaiwy 
Evy Aiywnyrtais Svaxdowot. This is called by Mommsen the ‘‘in- 
clusive’’ use, which seems the best term available, although it is 
obvious that in many instances the ovv cannot properly be trans- 
lated ‘‘including.’’ Such a meaning is often given in other lan- 
guages by the addition of some strengthening word, as in Latin 
una cum, Italian insieme con, Lithuanian draugé su (the usual 

* Tn this work the usage of the Attic inscriptions is also given, and statistics for the 
occurrence of the prepositions in question in certain works containing dialect inscrip- 
tions, namely the old Corpus, Roehl’s Ins. Gr. Ant., and two volumes of the new 
Corpus (IG. Sept. I and IG. Sic. et It.). But these are given without examples, 
and no attempt is made at a classification by dialects. Moreover this covers only a 
small part of the dialect material now extant. It is to supply this deficiency in 
Mommsen’s work that the present collection of dialect examples has been made. 
But it must be admitted that the number of occurrences of the two prepositions in 


genuinely dialectic material is astonishingly meagre, so much so that for many dia- 
lects no conclusion of their preference for one or the other preposition is warranted. 


54 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


expression for even general accompaniment), Anglo-Saxon aet- 
gaedere mid, German zusammen mit and mit sammt, etc. 

Only the inclusive use of cv is found in the Attic inscriptions 
also, where the preposition is even limited to a use with objects 
other than persons (Mommsen p. 497, Meisterh.* p. 221), 
though in many later prose writers and in inscriptions of the 
Roman period a freer use of ovv is revived. That this state of 
affairs is really a limitation of a former more general use of ov», 
to be considered side by side with the encroachment of pera 
(cf. below), is shown by the widespread use of ovv in compounds, 
and by the usage of Homer and later poets, where it is a frequent 
preposition until Euripides, who has werd with the genitive almost 
as much as ovr, the figures being ov 197, wera 101. The ex- 
istence of ovv denoting general accompaniment in several dialects, 
as shown by the examples given below, is an additional argu- 
ment for considering the limitation simply an Attic phenomenon. 

The original meaning of etd was that of ‘‘amid, among,’’ from 
which the sense of ‘‘ with’’ arose in Greek independently from Ger- 
manic. The close relation of the two ideas is emphasized by the re- 
verse development in Anglo-Saxon and Early English of with to 
the meaning ‘‘among’’ as Bo. 41, 4, Omerus, se goda scop, mid 
Grecum selest was, ‘‘ Homer, that good poet, was best among the 
Greeks,’’ and Alis. 3324, Justere he is with the beste. This 
is common in Modern English In Homer pera still means 
‘“among,’’* as shown by the fact that it occurs with the plural 
only, and with collective singulars in the six examples T 50, @ 
156 ayopn, X 49 otpata, r 449 avdparv apiOue, P 503 otpodpareyyt 
xovins, O 118 Keia@ar opod vexvero pel? aipati kal Kovinow. The 
case use in Homer is practically that of the dative, representing 
here the locative, there being but five examples of the use with the 


* Mommsen assumes a still earlier meaning of ‘‘ between,’’ because of the Homeric 
examples vera yépowv with éyexv (very common) and other verbs (E 344, 4372, x 10) 
yeTa yauondAjow N 200, etc., suggesting that the limited idea of position between two 
objects was broadened to the sense of ‘among more than two (7. e., several) objects.”’ 
Such an extension is in itself natural enough (cf. the development of au¢/) but there 
is not sufficient evidence that the original meaning was restricted. 





IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 55 


genitive, namely N 700, ® 458, 2 400, « 320, m 140, all of the 
plural number. The genitive use is equally rare in the succeeding 
poets (the only instances are Hesiod, Theog. 392, Stesichor. ( ?) 
fr. 32, Theogn. 1065, Simon. fr. 84, 1, Aesch. Prom. 1067), until 
Sophocles and Euripides, where it becomes very frequent. It is 
the regular construction in prose. Herodotus shows meta with 
the genitive almost as often as ovv (otv 72, werd 64), although 
never with the singular of inanimate objects, and only twice with 
the plural of such words, the context of even these two examples 
suggesting the meaning of personal objects. In many of the 
examples the meaning ‘‘among’’ may still be seen, and of the 
twenty-seven instances of his use of the singular with werd 
twenty-one are in the phrase of wera twos, and three in KopacOau 
(eddev) weta tevos, which shows a very restricted usage. But in 
the Attic writers from Thucydides on there is no such distinction 
between the use of the singular or plural with pera or its occur- 
rence with animate or inanimate objects, and wera with the geni- 
tive almost entirely crowds out cvv. This is the case in the Attic 
inscriptions also. Whether the dialects show any limitation to 
the use with plurals and collective singulars is doubtful, but what 
encroachment upon cvv exists is probably due in most cases to the 
influence of the «ow (cf. below). The case use is always that 
of the genitive, except in Arcadian, where, as shown by its use 
with other prepositions (cf. Ch. IV, I, 2, p. 71), the appearance 
of the dative is to be regarded as an independent dialectic phe- 
nomenon. 

The original meaning of 7reda was that of ‘‘ behind, after,’’ as 
shown by the use of its cognates Armenian yet ‘‘after,’’ Lettic 
péz ‘‘according to, after (i. e., in search of),’’ and its obvious 
derivation from the word for ‘‘foot,’’ Skt. pad, Grk. wovs,ete. In 
its use with the accusative it would become synonymous with pera 
with the accusative, whose force of ‘‘after’’ came through the 
meaning ‘‘into the midst of.’’ The meaning ‘‘with’’ of medd 
may be simply a further result of this agreement with mera in the 
sense of ‘‘after,’’ as held by Brugmann, Gr. Gram. $503 ‘‘ Ver- 
mutlich wurde 7eda zunichst in der Bedeutung ‘hinter etwas her’ 


56 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Synonym von pera und die partielle Ubereinstimmung im Ge- 
brauch fiihrte durch Synkretismus zu einer vollstandigen,’’ or it 
may have arisen independently of mera.* 

In view of the former possibility, a restricted use of meda 
might be looked for, but there is no evidence of it. The only 
inscriptional example of wedd in Lesbian is in the meaning 
‘‘after’’ (cf. p. 69), but, aside from the fact that Sappho shows 
it in both senses, this cannot be regarded as anything but acci- 
dental, and the same must be said of Theran, where algo the only 
example means ‘‘after’’ (cf. p. 70). The reverse accident, in 
fact, is seen in Arcadian, Boeotian, etc., where the only examples 
are in the meaning ‘‘with.’’ The two prepositions are apparently 
quite synonymous, and the use of one or the other js merely a 
question of dialect. Literary Greek shows 7redé in Aeolic and 
Doric, and in passages in tragedy, etc., composed in Doric. 
Kretschmer, KZ. 31, 449, suggests for Attic méravpov (Ionic and 
Euboean 7rérevpov) a derivation from meta and the stem of avpa 
(cf. weddopos).- Elsewhere it is found only in the dialects given 
below. There is no evidence of the co-existence of both preposi- 
tions in the same dialect. Whenever peta appears in an inscrip- 
tion of a dialect which also has veda it is late enough to be 
attributed unhesitatingly to the influence of the «own, although in 
some cases veda was not entirely crowded out by this ‘ow 
influence until Roman times. The dialect occurrences of weda 
are as follows: 

Lesbian shows but one example, SGDI. 213, 20 [390], spoken 
of above. The earliest instance of werd is SGDI. 281A, 12 [after 
334]. In Arcadian the only example is in the abbreviated form 
[7]é, as restored by Keil in the Mantinean inscription in Nachtr. 
d. Konig]. Ges. d. Wiss. 1895, 353, 16 [early 5th cent.]. This 
is supported by the proper name II[e]Sap/t SGDI. 1247 (front), 

* The least probable view is that of Osthoff, in Geschichte des Perfects im Indo- 
german. p. 574, which is just the opposite of Brugmann’s, namely, that the force of 
‘‘after’’ in wedé is taken over from perdé, because the cognates of the latter show an 
early use with the accusative in Old High German, Old Norse, and Anglo-Saxon, 


and because the influence of werd on medé is shown in the name of the month 
Ilerayeirvioc (cf. on Megarian, etc., below). 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 57 


B, 10. There is no example of meta. In Boeotian eda is fre- 
quent, as SGDI. 489, 5, 22 [end 3rd cent.], etc. The occur- 
rence of werd in the same inscription is evidently due to Kow7 
influence. Megarian shows only a trace of eda in the name of 
the month Iletayetvio SGDI. 3052, 19 [end 8rd or beginning 
2nd cent.]. The 7 in this is not a phonetic development, but evi- 
dently due to the Attic form Mertayetrmos. In line 10 of the 
same inscription #[éreote occurs, the » being somewhat uncertain, 
and there is an example of mera as an independent preposition of 
about the same date, namely, 3078, 11 [2nd cent.]. For this 
juxtaposition of wera- and peta cf. also Coan below. Argive has 
no independent use of 7eda* but several compounds occur, namely, 
meddpoioo. SGDI. 3265, 2, 3269, 8; wedadop[as] SGDI. 3325, 
276; Ileddxpiros SGDI. 3282, 3, and rediov (=peredv) SGDI. 
3277, 18. These are all of early date, the latest being probably 
medtav, which is to be placed after 405 B. C. The earliest in- 
stances of meta date from the second half of the fourth century, 
as SGDI. 3339, 20, ete. In Rhodian pera is the only form in 
which the preposition occurs, as SGDI. 3749, 87 [ca. 220], ete., 
but the name of the month Iledayefrmos (and Herayelrmos) is com- 
mon.t From Thera there is one example of weda, SGDI. 4772, 2 
[4th cent.], and two a century later of wera both in the same 
inscription, SGDI. 4706, 4, 110 [end 3rd cent.]. Cf. under 
Lesbian above. Calymnian shows peta only in the compound 
Tletayefrmos, SGDI. 3601, 1, Ditt. Sylloge 865, I, 1, 868, ITI, 8, 
none of these being of early date. Examples of meta from about 
the same time occur, as SGDI. 3585, 35 [ca. 323], ete. The same 
situation exists in Coan, wedd appearing only in Iletayetrmos 
SGDI. 3634b, 22, ec, 17 [2nd or 8rd cent.]. In line 16 of part 
a, Paton and Hicks restore redayertv]v(0)v, where perhaps TetTaryet- 

*Kretschmer, KZ. 31,449, quotes tet 'ixeAa from SGDI. 3246, 37, 39, but this is 
too doubtful an example to be of value. Blass (SGDI., 1. c.) and Kaibel (IGSic. 
et It. no. 217) do not attempt to give a reading of the passage, although both quote 
Stephanus’ suggestion 7er’ ixeAa (6p7.) 

+Iledayeitvoc SGDI. 4245, 144, 161, 192, 231, 298, 311, 469, 622. IGIns. I, 


1080, 1104, 1152, 10 ; 1159, 6; 1220, 16; 1414, 4. Merayeirviog SGDI. 4245, 250. 
Ditt. Sylloge 373,5. 


58 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


tv|v(o)v would be more correct. (For the complete inscription, 
of which SGDI has only a and part of b, cf. PH. 37.) By the 
side of this compound mera occurs in the same inscription, in line 
29 of b. Cf. Megarian above. Cretan shows only edd in the 
early inscriptions, as SGDI. 4991, III, 27 [middle 5th cent.], 
ete., and instances occur as late as 167 B. C., in SGDI. 5150, 14, 
etc. The first appearance of meta seems to be in the second cen- 
tury, as SGDI. 5040, 34, ete. These detailed statements show 
that veda is found in the five dialects Arcadian, Lesbian, Boeotian, 
Theran and Cretan, taking precedence chronologically in each case 
of the earliest example of werd. In Argive there are several com- 
pounds of edd indicating its previous independent existence in 
this dialect, and the name of the month corresponding to Attic 
Merayetma@v gives similar evidence for Megarian, Rhodian, 
Calymnian, and Coan. This is summarized in the following 
table: 











mera meda Compounds of weda 
Arcadian early 5th cent. 
Lesbian after 334 300. 
Boeotian end 3d cent. end 3d cent. 
Theran end 3d cent. 4th cent. 
Cretan 2d cent. middle 5th cent. 
Argive 2d half 4th cent. before 405 
Megarian | 2d cent. end 8d or beginning 2d cent. 
Rhodian ca. 220 no absolute dates 
Calymnian | ca. 323 late 
Coan 3d or 2d cent. 3d or 2d cent. 














I. AccoMPANIMENT. 


1. ovv. 


a. Helpful (cf. p. 53 above). 


Ionic. Hoff. III, 177, 6 [855], Mavooa@drov pév cwbevtos ovv 
tau Au. Perhaps Hoff. 59 [560], 168 dyad] pa—[p’ éréreooe 
avy viod ’A|pxépyov co[p] ow (Frohner’s restoration) may also 
be placed here. But no other editor reads a preposition in the 


text, so the example is at all events a doubtful one. 
Cyprian. SGDI. 120, 4, Pua(r)&ea ’Ovacipdw ro ’Arror(A)ore 


ara aia Te 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 59 


T® Maryipio oveOnxe, av(v) Tuya. Of. wv Toyat and U Tbya, Ch. IV, 
III, 3, p. 78. 
b. Incluswe (ef. p. 58 above). 


Ionic. Hoff. IIT, 131, 2 [ca. 450], AapBavérw dé rev Ovopevov 
axéros év, dxoiov av OédAm, adv t[H] Oopt. There are other later 
examples. 

Boeotian. SGDI. 489, 38 [end 3rd cent.], eiwev rroridedopevov 
xpovov KiBeru érwopias féria 1értapa Rovers. cov tmrus Siaxartins 
fixate mpoBdtus covv nyus xeirtis. Cf. also BCH. 14, 379, no. 
29, 11 [before end 38rd cent. |. 

Locrian. SGDI. 1500, 1 [229], warpos apifjroro Tlodvxpirou 
via ov imma Sépxeo. This is in such artificial language (in a 
metrical inscription) that it is of little value. 

Heraclean. SGDI. 4629, I, 89 [4th cent. ], apiOuos dpav—érra 
ow Ta emt Tas wrevpidoos, él Sé Tas Tpraxovtatrédw oKTo adv TAL 
TETPO<t> pwt,—eémt 5 TH—ErrTa oly Tai Tap Tav BuBAivay pacydXrav. 

Megarian. SGDI. 3052, 28 [end of 3rd or beginning 2nd 
cent. ], [Te]a tepwrelas adv éxatooTa K[al tpraxo|aoTar Spay pat 
TEVTAKLOX IAAL. 

Corinthian. CIGP. et Ins. I, 203, 11 [Roman], Tovs Bwpods 
ovv,T@ TEptsorw Kai mpovdw. There are other examples of similar 
date. 

Argive. CIGP. et Ins. I, 823, 9 [4th cent.], él rau rowde rod 
otuhoBata wap... [o]dv tais muddiot. There are other ex- 
amples of this date and later. 

Calymnian. SGDI. 3591b, 26 [2nd or 1st cent.], Ta dredoura 
TOV YpnuaToy TovTwV & yiveTaL ow T[ 0] Kan. 

Coan. SGDI. 3624b, 41 [ca. 205], Krerias cai Ev&/uBpor[ os 


To |t @ev[S]a@pou odv tae Tide Tod olvov X. 


c. Gwing the eponymous officer. 
Locrian. SGDI. 1478, 46 [1st half 5th cent.], Xarelos tois ovv 


’"Avtibdta fouxntais. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 4119, 3 [3rd cent.], mpootaray?] tav ow 
Tlewovctpa[ro. Later examples are SGDI. 3751, 2, 8 [ca. 170], 
8842, 4, 4939, 4, 14 and 3754, 1. 


60 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Theran. SGDI. 4706, 1 [end 8rd cent.], éi épdépwv trav odvv 
@oSorédXex. A similar phrase occurs in lines 109 and 270. 

Coan. SGDI. 3624b, 29 [ca. 205], wpoordra: rol ov X[a] pi- 
vo[t Another example occurs SGDI. 3630, 5 [ca. 3rd cent.], 
and later ones in SGDI. 3678, 3679, 3680 and PH. 156, 159. 

Cretan. SGDI. 4991, V, 6 [middle 5th cent.], d«’ 6 A@[a]- 
Aev(s) TTapTos éxdapwov of adv Ki[A] rar. 

These examples suggest that in this use, as well as in those of 
the two preceding categories, s¥v remained longer than in that of 
general accompaniment. There is no other instance of ovv in 
Locrian, except a late example in the inclusive use (cf. above), 
and in the same inscription mera is used in almost an inclusive 
sense (cf. below, p. 63). In Theran and Coan there are no other 
examples of svv and Cretan shows no other instance of ovv in the 
Gortynian code, although there are fragmentary examples of about 
the same date in the meaning of general accompaniment (cf. be- 
low). The use of ov in giving the eponymous officer is very 
frequent in the later Cretan inscriptions. For the contrast be- 
tween ovv and pera in this usage cf. p. 62, where a comparison 
with the usage of audi and epi to give the same idea is also made. 


d. In general. 


Tonic. Hoff. III, 112 [660-610], Ila(p)Sis 6 Poropwuos vv 
WVapupar(ixor). 

Lesbian. SGDI. 321, 1 [130 A. D.], dre ctv 7h LeBaorh TaPei- 
ynt eyevounv trapa Ta Méuvou. 

Megarian. SGDI. 3045A, 11 [end 6th cent.], . . . @ ypnuata 
[és Méyapa érjavirw oly r@ Méyap[ei. This is the restoration 
of Dittenberger and Purgold in Ol. V, 22. Another example, 
with the preposition partly restored, occurs in B, 22, of the same 
inscription. 

Corinthian. SGDI. 3188, 6 [archaic], T[pa&imévns—ow Sdp- 
[w]e rdde capa Kaovyvyrovo TrovnOn. 

Argive. CIGP. et Ins. I, 917, 10 [4th cent.], 7a tap[@] wara— 
méumes[Oale ov tae tL Gv] ’Emidauplwv [dp] ra. 


Cretan. SGDI. 4992, IV, b, 5 [middle 5th cent.],. . . aw al 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 61 


ka \Hu ov paitupo[t. A similar fragmentary example of some- 
what later date is SGDI. 5092, 3, 4. For a discussion of these 
examples cf. under peta, p. 64. An example of ovv which may 
perhaps indicate the Rhodian usage occurs in the beginning of the 
Abou-Simbel inscription, the Ionic portion of which has been 
quoted above (Hoff. IfI, 112). For the complete inscription cf. 
Rohl IGA. no. 482. The sentence in question is Tatra éypayar, 
tol av Vaypariyo @eoxr(¢)os érdeov. Since there are Doric phe- 
nomena here, and since some of the following sentences are un- 
doubtedly Rhodian (so given SGDI. 4109a), the assumption that 
Rhodian syntax is shown may not be altogether unwarranted. 


2. pera. 


a. Gwing the eponymous officer. 


Lesbian. SGDI. 304A, 45 [319-317], avdypayra Sé ois 
tapias Tois wet’ "Hpaxreltw ro wadiopa. 

Delphian. SGDI. 2504A, 5, p. 934 [344-352], tepouynuovotvtwy 
Tap peta Aaloyov cai Opa[avddov. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 3777, 4 [75], tema(@é)vra wr[o tov xow]o[d 
Tov] pet’ a(v)T[od ov] votpat[evoap] evo |v. 

Cretan. SGDI. 5015, 25 [after 183], af’ ® « arooravts Top- 
Tu. pev ot ed’ ’Apye[uadxw Koppor—[Kvwcot dé ad’ @ x’ avoljo- 
Tavtt ot Ted Kvpv0Gevia Kdppo.. 

The date of these examples is in each dialect later than that of. 
the first occurrence of meta to express general accompaniment. 
Consequently they are of interest only in comparison with the 
examples of ovv (cf. p. 64) and of wepé and audi (cf. Ch. III, 
I, B, 2, p. 30 f.) in giving the eponymous officer. The material 
is however so scanty that with the exception of Delphian, Argive, 
Rhodian and Cretan no dialect shows examples of the use of 
more than one of these prepositions in such a use. In Delphian 
the example of meta is somewhat earlier than that of mepé, and 
possibly its use with a word of religious import like lepouvnpovovr- 
Tov suggests also that it is the more formal and archaic usage. 
The Rhodian instances of ep¢ and pera are so late that they are 


62 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


of little importance. The Cretan example of weda is interesting 
because the phrase Tov oly ’Apyeuayor occurs in the opening lines 
of the same inscription. Doubtless the use of eda is due to the 
general encroachment upon ovv which was prévalent at this time 
in the dialects. This is supported by the fact that ovv occurs in 
a forced and unnatural phrase in giving the eponymous officer in 
a still earlier inscription, SGDI. 5007, 4 [8rd cent.], suggesting 





that by this time the composer was awkward in his use of it. 
The facts are shown in summarized form in the following table: 














api mepi ovv OM} wera 
Tonic 4th cent. 
Arcadian early 
Lesbian 319 
Thessalian Roman 
Phocian Roman 
Delphian 336-326 '| 344-332 
Locrian Ist half 5th cent. 
Elean middle 4th cent. 
Laconian 1st or 2nd cent. 
Megarian 1st cent. 
Argive 5th cent. | 150 
Rhodian 2nd cent. 3rd cent. 75 
Theran end 3rd cent. 
Coan 205 
Cretan late middle 5th cent. 183 














b. In general. 


Ionic. Hoff. III, 177, 12 [355], édeyxOdvros 5é nal Oiccov— 
kat KpiOévros cuvadixeiv eta Mavira. 


Arcadian. Nachr. d. Konigl. Ges. d. Wiss. 1895, 353, 16 
[early 5th cent.], € @]voolar kaxpiO7n } TOV ypnudtov [1 ]é Tois 


fouxcatat[s. For an example of similar phraseology cf. Locrian 
below. 
Lesbian. SGDI. 281A, 12 [after 334], trav dé rodw Kal ra 


Ip[a] Siapracas peta THv Naictay évérpyeoe. 

Boeotian. SGDI. 705, 2 [355-346], wéXeuor tov] érro[reucov] 
Bowwrol re[Sa Tay cvppayev r]oT THs aceBiovras. For complete 
examples of later date cf. SGDI. 488, 153 [223-197], ete. 

Phocian. SGDI. 1539, 28 [after 181], cvvds[«] ake 82 0 cepo- 
Taplas peta TOV apydovTwv Tas Sixas. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 63 


Delphian. SGDI. 2502, 133 [853-325], mpocuperol tmd ras 
moos peta Tas Bovrds ’Etupa@veas. ( 

Aetolian. SGDI. 1413, 6 [197-159], TeOdwev] aydves Kat 
Ovotas Ta AOava Ta Nixaddpm peta Tov ddeXdav Kal Tod Sdpov. 

Locrian. SGDI. 1478, 43 [1st half 5th cent.], ypnuata rapa- 
topayeiota TO wépos peta forxiaTay. Sioudcar hdpoov tov vdmuor. 
The meaning of this much discussed passage* is probably that 
suggested by Rohl, IGA 321 ‘‘bonaque eius publicantur, pars cum 
servis. ’” 

Elean. Ol. V, 45, 7 [806], tol d€ otpararyol émipe[ re cbov 
peta] ta[s B]ovras. 

Heraclean. SGDI. 4629, I, 124 [4th cent.], r@s—7rodavopws 
—robedopevas pet’ adres a’tav—dséxa avopas. 

Laconian. SGDI. 4568, 50 [86], e&doTw avrois émixabjcla 
pera TOV épdpev év mpoedpi'at. 

Megarian. SGDI. 3087, 8 [ca. 1st cent.], laddxou dé rod ZKv- 
Gav Bacire'os aipvidi'ws ériuBardvros peta Gydov TOrXOD. 

Corinthian. SGDI. 3206, 132 [8rd or 2nd cent. ], éySaverSéoOw 
peTa TOD GAXov apryupe ov rabias 2 érave yéypaTrat. 

Argive. SGDI. 3342, 50 [early 2nd cent. ], éducey a@diva Aros 
mais wera M[o]ipav Adyeou's te Maia a od olin 

Rhodian. SGDI. 3749, 87 [ca. 220], tol dé aipeOevtes wera Tov 
mapayeyevnucvey e& ‘leparrity[as] mpeoBevtav opxEdvrov. 

Theran. SGDI. 4706, 4 [end 3rd cent.], rade dePero—’ Emx- 
tyra Tpit vvov pera xuplov “Trrepe'Sovs tod OracvddovTos. 

Calymnian. SGDI. 3592, 5 [2nd or 1st cent.], ...v Tas 
Sixas Gs édi'nale . . . peta eritporov Pitt . . . 

Coan. SGDI. 3619, 11 [ca. 265], émipernOévrw dé Kai tas ava- 
ryopevatos Tov atepdvou peta TOV aywvoléra. 

Cretan, SGDI. 4991, III, 27 [middle 5th cent.], ta te fa 
atras éyev—xa[t t[@ xapr[@] 7H &S[0] bev edd tov émiBardov- 
[tov] potpav raxé[v. 

Except in Arcadian and Elean, each of which shows but one 

*Cf. Roberts, Introd. to Grk. Epigraphy p. 354, Vischer, Rh. Mus. 26, 72, 


Gilbert, Griech. Staats-Alt. II, 40 ftn., Meister, Ber. Kénigl. Sachs. Ges, d. Wiss. 
1895, 325, ete. 


64 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


example of etd, the preposition appears at least two or three times 
in each of the dialects quoted above. An examination of these 
examples in comparison with those of ovv in the same use given 
on p. 60 shows that in the dialects wera crowded out ovr to a less 
extent than in Attic. Im many cases the date of the earliest in- 
stance of wea is late enough that the preference for this preposi- 
tion may be due to «ov influence, and only Arcadian, Locrian and 
Cretan show early examples of it. In Arcadian the paucity of 
material prevents ascribing to anything but accident the fact that 
there is no example of ovv, as well as the fact that the one example 
of pera happens to be with the plural. The same must be said of 
Locrian, in which ovv occurs but once, in the usage where the 
eponymous officer is given by the use of the preposition, and the 
only early examples of werd in this use, both with the plural, are 
found in this same inscription.* Since, however, one of these in- 
stances of werd (quoted above, p. 60) expresses such close connec- 
tion as to recall the inclusive use of ovv (as does also the Arcadian 
example of meta), some encroachment upon ovv may be indicated. 
In Cretan there are five early examples of edd (SGDI. 4991, 
ITI, 27, X, 49, 4985, 5), three of which are with the plural, and 
one with a collective noun, in contrast to one example of ovv with 
the eponymous officer, in the Gortynian code, and two fragmentary 
examples of general accompaniment of about the same date. In 
later inscriptions 7e6a@ is common, but ovv occurs only in giving 
the eponymous officer, in which use it is frequent. Perhaps some 
slight restriction in the use of the latter preposition may be as- 
sumed here. Ionic, Megarian, Corinthian, Argive and Rhodian 
show early examples of the use of cvv to express general accom- 
paniment. The Ionic example is of interest as a parallel to the 
frequent use of ovv in Ionic writers, as Herodotus, etc., and to the 
Tonicism of Xenophon in this point. The epic style of the Corin- 
thian example detracts from its value as an index to the prose 
usage of the dialect. Theran and Coan show later instances of 


*The other examples of werd are SGDI. 1504A, 4 [ca. 299], and three restored 
passages, SGDI. 1504BA, 4, 1505, 2 [8rd or 2nd cent. ], and CIGS. III, 269 [2nd 
cent. ] in all of which the plural is used. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 65 


ovv in this use, the example from Thera being in the same in- 
scription which furnishes the earliest example of wera. A limita- 
tion of cvv to the inclusive use seems to be evident in Boeotian. 
But the inscriptions are late enough to prevent any certainty that 
it is an independent dialectic phenomenon, and it may be merely 
an indication of the influence of Attic which is perhaps seen in 
some other points (cf. p. 49). Heraclean and Calymnian may 
perhaps agree with Boeotian in this respect, but the lack of ma- 
terial does not permit anything more than the suggestion of this 
possibility. That Cyprian shows no example of meta and none 
of cvv except in the use of helpful accompaniment is doubtless 
accidental, in view of the scarcity of material. That ovv existed 
here in other uses is shown by the example of this preposition 
expressing instrument or manner (cf. II, p. 68). Likewise Del- 
phian has an example from the early fourth century, and Elean 
one of the sixth century, of cvv in this instrumental use (cf. p. 
68), which shows that stress can not be laid upon the lack of ex- 
amples of the preposition expressing general accompaniment. 
The following table gives the above facts in summarized form: 





























avy mera 
P Inclusive, pe fo a! fa General. 
Tonic 355 | ca. 450 660-610 355 
(560?) 
Arcadian early 5th cent. 
Cyprian | early 
Lesbian 130 A. D. after 334 
Boeotian end 3d cent. 355-346 
Phocian after 181 
Delphian end Ist cent. 353-325 
Aetolian 197-159 
Locrian 229 1st half 5th cent. 1st half 5th cent. 
Elean 306 
Heraclean Ath cent. 4th cent. 
Megarian end 3d cent. end 6th cent. ca. Ist cent. 
Corinthian archaic 3d or 2d cent. 
Argive 4th cent. 4th cent. early 2d cent. 
Rhodian 3d cent. (660-610) ca. 220 
Theran end 3d cent. end 3d cent. end 3d cent. 
Calymnian 2d or 1st cent. 2d or Ist cent. 
Coan ca. 205. ca. 205 ca. 205 ca. 265 
Cretan middle 5th cent.} middle 5th cent.| middle 5th cent. 





66 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Il, Manner. 


The use of a sociative preposition to express manner is occa- 
sionally found in Sanskrit, as R.V. 3, 12, 6, Indragni, navatim 
puro dasapatnir adhinutam sakam ekena karmanda, ‘‘ Indra and 
Agni, you have shaken ninety demon-ruled cities with one act,’’ 
and R. V. 10, 32, 3 jaya patim vahati vagnund sumat, ‘‘the wife 
leads the husband home with a joyous ery.’’ (This is the only 
occurrence of swmat as a preposition, but in Avestan maf is com- 
mon, as Yasna 11, 4, 5, Ys. 57, 26, etc.) In Latin cum occurs 
except in common phrases (where no preposition is used), as Cie. 
Fin. 4, 22, 61, cum summa tua digmitate, and this use of the so- 
ciative preposition remains in the Romance languages. In Gothic 
mip is common, as Mark 4,16, suns mip fahadai nimand ita, ev0éws 
peta xapas KapBavovew avrov, and mit is used in Old High Ger- 
man, as mit freuut, mit heilu leven, ‘‘to live with joy, with good 
fortune,’’ and in Modern German as well. Anglo-Saxon uses 
mid, as Be. 68, 2, selle mid eadmedum his waepn, ‘‘ Let him with 
humility give up his weapons.’’ It occurs with the dative also, 
as well as with the instrumental shown in this example, and, in 
the phrase mid ryht, with the accusative. An example from Early 
English is R. of Gl., p. 24, tok hire forP wip hym mid gret honour 
ynowz, but wiP becomes the regular preposition in this use as 
elsewhere, as Alis. 1121, wif gret leore and wif gret schond. 
Lithuanian sometimes uses su as Mark 4, 16, tojatis t@ su dzaugs- 
mu prima, ‘‘immediately receive it with gladness,’’ but this is 
less correct than the use of the participle modifying the subject 
of the verb. In Old Bulgarian sz is sometimes used, as Mark 4, 
16, abie sti radostiya priemlyati e, ev0éws peta yapas N\auBavovew 
auTo Vv, 

Greek literature shows this usage with mera as Plato, Apol. 34e, 
ixerevew peta Saxptwv, Gorg. 526c, oolws kal per’ adnOetas. It 
does not occur in the Attic inscriptions of. the classical period, but 
is common later, as CIA. II, 334a, 1, b, 12 [270-262], per’ 
achanrelas, etc. Examples of ovv expressing manner are not fre- 
quent. Thucydides shows six examples of its use with abstracts, 


eet er ee 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 67 


as 1, 84, 2, &dv éar'vm (cf. Mommsen, p. 376). Plato has sev- 
eral instances in evidently poetic passages, as Pol. IV, 424e, 
ow Toy acedyela. Examples of ovv in a meaning that is partly 
manner partly instrumental occur in poetry, as Od. 5, 293, ovv 
vepedéect Kadupev yaiav, Aesch. Sept. 885, SujdrAaxGe ody oidapg, 
but in prose and in Attic inscriptions the simple dative takes its 
place for the instrumental sense. 


1. pera. 


Ionic. Hoff. III, 13B, 13 [394], my (a)[oveicP]ac pire'nv 
"Aptvray pndé Xadrnid[das xwpils éxatépovs, adda peta pals 
yvouns. This is the reading of all editors but Hoffmann, who 
prefers pua[v yvopunv, because elsewhere throughout the inscrip- 
tion there is no Atticism as the @ in msds must here be (Smyth, 
Tonic Dialect, p. 339). But to admit an Atticism in the phonetic 
character of the inscription is probably safer than to assume with- 
out additional evidence such a syntactic variation from the usage 
of literature and the other dialects. 

Lesbian. SGDI. 304A, 28 [319-317], 7 aAXa mpdoce per’ 
evvolas. 

Delphian. SGDI. 2072, 22 [198], mapapeveiv—pera mdoas 
evvolas. 

Megarian. SGDI. 3089, 3 [Roman], éxrevas kal mpoPipws Kai 
be[ Ta map|pnov'as éypnuariter. 

Argive. CIGP. et Ins. I, 1, 9 [ea. 200], d[cxar'ws | rpocevnvey- 
pévou Taow peta THS Taons KaPape| OTN] TOS. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 3750a, 15 [ca. 201], meta mdoas orovdds Kai 
dirorip| fas] am[o|xpivacbae avrois. 

Calymnian. SGDI. 3569, 3 [4th or 3rd cent.], wavta mpacowy 
—duetetedexe Tat ZaTpr ds peta [a] cas evvolas. 

Cretan. SGDI. 5016, 16 [after 183], émvredeOOévtwy dé Tov- 
to|v| wed[a ras] Wey Oiav evvot'as. 

Of the eight dialects which show pera in this use, Ionic, Les- 
bian, and Megarian furnish but one example each, Rhodian two, 
and Calymnian three. The earliest instance is dated 394, and 
most of the others are much later, so that it is not certain whether 


68 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


the usage was a general Greek one, or is widespread because of the 
influence of the xoww7. 


2. avy. 


Cyprian. SGDI. 60, 28, Bacirevs Kas a modus Katébijav iv) 
Ta(v) Olov—ovv Spxors. | 

Delphian. SGDI. 2561A, 20 [early 4th cent.], é60—odp wa- 
gos. The same phraseology, except that the singular is used, 
occurs in SGDI. 2615, 3, 2621, 3 (restored), 2624, 4, 2627, 1, 
2844, 2845. Cf, &d ras wddou in 2642, 43, ete. 

Elean. SGDI. 1156, 4 [6th cent.], eEaypéwv cal évrromy ovy 
Borat revtaxati wv a¢ravéws Kal Sduor wrHOvovTt. 

Argive. SGDI. 3342, 63 [ca. 200], cuvavtjcas ody drdoow 
Aaptro mevos ypucéois. 

It will be seen that the Elean example in this list expresses 
manner only so far as accordance, ‘‘with the consent of,’’ may be 
thus classified. The remaining three examples might almost as 
well be placed under a category of instrumental uses. (Cf. the 
literary and Attic use of ovv above.) Since this is quite in con- 
trast with the clearcut meaning to be found in most of the ex- 
amples of meta, it may be of interest to state briefly here the 
methods of expressing instrument in other languages. Usually 
the simple instrumental case (Latin ablative, Gothic dative) 
serves this purpose, but the same sociative prepositions which are 
used to express manner are found sometimes also expressing instru- 
ment, except in Sanskrit, where the variation may doubtless be 
referred to the fact that this language possesses a rather large 
number of sociative prepositions. Sanskrit saha sometimes 
occurs, as Kathas. 37, 62, prajvalyagnim sahendhanath ‘‘ having 
caused the fire to burn with fuel.’’ Latin shows cum in this use 
in ante-classical, poetic and scientific literature, as Cat. 98, 3, cwm 
lingua lingere, Verg. Aen. 9, 816, cum suo gurgite accepit venien- 
tem (fluvius), and the same usage appears in the Romance lan- 
guages, with Italian con, French avec, ete. In Gothic mf is 
rarely used, as Matth. 26, 72, afaiatk mip aiPa swarands, npyjcato 
peta Opxov, but the preposition is more common in Old High Ger- 





IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 69 


man, as mit fiurw brennen, ‘‘to burn with fire’’ and its use is 
regular in Modern German. Anglo-Saxon regularly uses mid, 
as Or. 158, 32, mid ane stane ofworfen, ‘‘struck with a stone,’’ 
the dative and accusative occurring, as well as the instrumental. 
The Modern English use of with to express this is seen in Early 
English also, as R. of Gl. p. 174, fe kynng was above yarmed 
wyP haubert noble and ryche. The occasional use of sw in Lithu- 
anian is a Germanism due to the influence of mit. Old Bulgarian 
sometimes uses st, as Matth. 26, 72, ottivruée se si kletvoya, 
npvncato weTa Spkov. 


TI]. pera ‘‘arrer.’’ 


Greek seems to be the only language which developed the tem- 
poral meaning ‘‘after’’ in a sociative preposition. (For the origin 
of the sense of ‘‘after’’ in meta cf. p. 55 above). Mommsen 
(1. ¢., p. 42) points out that mera often means ‘‘after’’ in order 
or series in certain parts of the Odyssey (frequently in the eleventh 
book), but has not yet taken on a temporal sense. In later Greek 
literature this use is common, especially in the phrases meta tavra, 
ete. In the dialects quoted below examples are fairly frequent, 
except in Ionic and Phocian in each of which there are but two, 
and in Boeotian and Megarian which each give but one. (The 
dialects show no examples of the local use which might be ex- 
pected to occur.) 

Ionic. CIGS. I, 298, 20 [ca. 270], mpd ]codov—mpwras wera 
Ta iepa. 

Lesbian. SGDI. 213, 20 [390], adpye: mpcrams 6 eda Kodwvor, 
€[m PD] axa dé 6 eda Apia [7] apxov. 

Boeotian. OIGS. I, 339, 1 [Roman], tapapeitvacay tov émavrov 
do7s Ka per’ EvBoloxov apyet. 

Phocian. CIGS. I, 228, 2 [2nd cent.], trav cataB]o[rav trav] 
Tpitav Tudalas [orwpw] as Tas peta tav Bovdapyiay T. . . 

Delphian. SGDI. 2561A, 40 [ca. 400], watayopeirm év ti 
aria Ta peta Bovndria. 

Locrian. SGDI. 1478, 13, [1st half 5th cent.], tov éppov—éma- 
yelv META TpLaoOVTA FéTEA, 


70 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Laconian. SGDI. 4689, 29 [90], & S€ tae mwoumds dye'oto 
Mvacictpatos—peta 5é tadta ai wrapbévou. 

Megarian. SGDI. 3078, 11 [2nd cent.], «at épodov émi rav 
Bovray Kai tov Sapmov mparow peta Ta iepa. 

Corinthian. SGDI. 3206, 56 [3rd or 2nd cent.], 4 wyvi Ev- 
Krelor TOL META TrPUTaULY ’ApioTouern. 

Argive. SGDI. 3339, 20 [2nd half 4th cent.], peta dé Todo 
—éEeNOovoa. 

Rhodian. SGDI. 3749, 30 [220], «& dé Ka peta tov yeypap- 
pevOV YPOVOY METATTE WITWYTAL. 

Theran, SGDI. 4772, 2 [4th cent.], “Aptaperiov rerapras med” 
ixada OvaegovTt iapov. 

Calymnian. SGDI. 3585, 35 [ca. 320], m0@odov roti trav 
éx |KAnovav peta Ta i(e)pa. 

Coan. SGDI. 3720, 11 [8rd or 2nd cent.], tov’ te Nowrot Tot 
[leva TadTa aipedpevor. 

Cretan. SGDI. 4991, II, 13 [middle 5th cent.], ai dé xa 
Sedapv[a]uevay med? auepay [6] Sedov, ai dé x’ ev vutri, dU ddeddvs. 


CHAPTER IV. 


PEcULIARITIES SHOWN By VARIOUS OTHER PREPOSITIONS 
In CrRTAIn DIALECTS. 


I. Opp CASE USES. 


1. dvevs with the accusative, in Elean. 


SGDI. 1157, 8 [archaic], ... tas dvevs Bwrdv Kai Capov 
mraGvovta. Although the literary uses and the inscriptional oc- 
currences of this preposition outside of Elean are uniformly with 
the genitive, this development to an accusative use is a natural one, 
in view of the Greek fondness for this case which becomes so 
evident in the later language. (Cf. rapa with the accusative for 
the dative and mpdés with the accusative for the genitive, II, 3, 4, 
pp. 75 and 76.) The cognate prepositions in Germanic occur 
with the accusative only, as Goth. John 15, 5, Pater inuh mik m 
magup taujan ni waiht, dtr xwpis éuod od Sivacbe rroseiv ovder, 
and OHG. dno mth, ‘‘without me.’’ This might suggest that 
the Elean use is a retention of an early construction instead of an 
independent dialectic development. 


2. amd and é« with the dative, in Arcado-Cyprian. 
a. amo. 
Arcadian. Rohl, Im. 2, 6, 22 [archaic], ameyopivos xatmppev- 
TEpOV Y&VOS Tvat GwaTa WavTa av TOE LEepot. 
SGDI. 1222, 4 [Pre-Roman], tv auépars tpici amd tai adv to 
adixnua yévntot. 
Cyprian. SGDI. 60, 8, 7 Su¢dvor—ard tai Cai tat Bactréfos 
—70(v) x@por. 
SGDI. 59, 3, BadApapy] 6 ’ABidpirkov 7H ’Arrorx(A)ou TH Apv- 
Kw ad’ di fot Tas evYwGs erréTUXE. 
b. éx. 
Acradian. SGDI. 1222, 49 [Pre-Roman], Top peév épyarapy 


éadédXovtes és rot épyor. A compound occurs in line 54, mds tai 


érés Tot Epryou yeypaup| var ov] yypad[oz. 
71 


72 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Cyprian. SGDI. 60, 5, do¢évar &€& rau fou'Kwt Tat Bacirécos Kas 
e€ tai mrdALje apyvpw ta[Aavrov] a ta[davtov. Similar expres- 
sions occur in lines 11 and 24. 

An instance of this construction seems to occur also in a dialect 
which, except for this example, shows practically no material for 
the study of its prepositions, namely, in Pamphylian, SGDI. 
1267, 4, d]yjaxexpapévas e& éritn[S] jas mow a... 

This construction of a7é and é« does not occur in literary 
Greek, and is to be considered an independent dialectic develop- 
ment within Arcado-Cyprian (cf. Brugmann, Gr. Gram. pp. 398, 
437). The general preference here for the dative rather than 
the genitive is shown by the. use of wepc’ and trép also with this 
case. (Cf. Ch. II, ITI, 1. }, p. 35; IV, 2. b, p. 46; and Ch. ITI, 
I, 2, b, p. 62.) Delbriick in Brugmann’s Grundriss III, p. 668, 
suggests as a possible reason for this development the influence of 
év with the dative. But no cause is apparent for the suscepti- 
bility of these dialects alone to the influence of a preposition so 
common everywhere as €v. 


II. Opp MEANINGS IN COMMON CASE USES. 
1. éc’ with the genitive for the dative, in Boeotian. 


CIG. 1625, 66 [Roman], 6 S€—ravpoburncas Ad TO peyl oto 
él THs 7OAews. There is one example of this construction in an 
Attic inscription (Meisterh.2? p. 217), namely, CIA. 732, 2 
[after 307], orép]avos éf’ ob ta dv0 [TT. 


2. xata with the genitive for the accusative, in Locrian. 


SGDI. 1508, 9 [2nd cent.], evpawér[w S€6 Oddwv ror talv 
Bovrav, xa?” Ov kat tas évpavi'as. 

SGDI. 1479, 15 [5th cent.], a? « 6 facords mot TOV facto 
Sinafntas Ka(t) tas ovvBordas. 

SGDI. 1478, 1 [1st half 5th cent.], év Navzaxtov xa(r)ta@vde 
ATL OLKL a, 

SGDI. 1478, 33 [1st half 5th cent.], ods émigoi’qous év 


Navrraxtov tav Si kav mpddipov apéorat 10(T)Tods Sixacrijpas, apérras 


eS ee ee 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. OTS 


kai ddpev év Orrdevts Kata féos adtapapdv. Aoopav tay “TrroKvapu- 
dv @v TpocTdtay KaTacTaca. ... 

The first three examples are evidently quite similar. The fre- 
quent cata tav ovpBorav of the Delphian inscriptions (SGDI. 
1715, 5, 1718, 9, ete.) and also a Locrian manumission decree 
SGDI. 1477, 5, «]ara 70 ctuBorov are compared in support of the 
singular number which the reading of the genitive makes possible 
in the second example. 

The acceptance of the genitive for the third example, and the 
interpretation xa(r)T@vde = Attic xata Trade avoids the harsh ellipsis 
which the reading of the accusative brings about. For to assume 
a reading Tovée, standing for to'vde tov vo wov (Vischer, Rh. Mus. 
26, 46), is to admit what Dittenberger CIGS. III, p. 85, urges 
**a Graecarum sermone aliena est.’’ Rohl, IGA. 321, proposed 
the reading xa(t) to'vde d(yéoTw Tov vo pov é)rifocKi'a, supposing the 
omission on the stone due to the carelessness of the engraver, while 
the emendation xa(7) tévde (Tov vo pov) is the suggestion of Bursian, 
Litt. Centralblatt 1870, 155. Curtius, Studien 2, 446, adopted 
the genitive, but compared examples which are not parallel, as 
Ar. Ran. 101, ouvivar xa” iepar, ete. 

In regard to the xata féos of the last example given above, 
various suggestions have been made. The interpretation of Féos 
as genitive singular of the pronoun of the third person, construed 
with «xara like the Attic accusative with «ata (= xal’ éavtoy), 
is supported by the three other Locrian examples of this construc- 
tion, but is rendered difficult by the context. Réhl, IGA. 321, 
inserts after Sicacrhpas the words Kal Sdpev év ’"Omdevtt kata 
Féwv adrapapov cal, and reads Adxpov tov ‘Yzroxvayidiov in the 
accusative, translating ‘‘coloni Naupactum proficiscentes prae 
ceteris litem instituunto coram iudicibus et contra se permittunto 
Opunto uno die, et instituito et contra se permittito litem Opunte 
uno die Locrus Hypoknemidius.’’ Meister, Ber. K. Sachs. Ges. 
d. Wiss. 1895, 317 ff., improves upon this by interpreting «ata 
Féos in the light of the other Locrian examples (comparing Hdt. 
7, 158, 70 war’ dudas tcSe drravta bd BapBdpovor véwerar, for the 


14; SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


meaning) and translating ‘‘ Der Hypoknemidische Lokrer soll sich 
also dem in Opus klagenden émigoxos soviel auf ihm an- 
kommt, am selben tage stellen,’’ thus avoiding any addition to 
the text. But in the same publication for 1896 he returns, p. 43, 
to Rohl’s interpretation ‘‘contra se,’’ because of Wackernagel’s 
contention that «ata féos is not parallel to «a(t)T@vde, and his 
reminder that ‘‘bei Processen in Opus ein Lokrer nur als Be- 
klagter sein kénne,’’ and considers the whole passage 70(T)Tovs 
dicactijpas apéorat epanaleptic. 

The flaw in Meister’s first suggestion is, as pointed out by 
Danielsson, Eranos 3, 69, his interpretation of apéora: differently 
in lines 32 and 34. He states, p. 324, that Séeav apéotar = Attic 
dieny rAaxelv, expressing the relation of the accuser to the judge, 
while (av Sixav) dpéora: cat Séuev he interprets, in the light of 
Hymn. ets ‘Epy. 312, dds dé Sixnv cai dé&o mapa Znvi Kpovior, 
etc., as expressing the opposing relations of the two parties to each 
other. His second view gives the same meaning to the second 
apéora as to the first, but brings in an equally grave difficulty by 
making Sduev correlative to dpéotar; and that the accused could 
present himself for trial upon the day of the accusation, no matter 
how great distances must be travelled to accomplish this, is absurd, 

even if there were no other trouble with this interpretation. Dit- 
- tenberger, CIGS. III, p. 87, concluded that xatafeos must be an 
unknown word, or contain an engraver’s error. Three attempts 
at emendation have been made. Oikonomides, the first editor of 
the inscription, read «ata ¢ér)os, which has been rather generally 
adopted, but cannot be very satisfactorily interpreted. Rieden- 
auer, Hermes, 7, 111, proposed «ata [yp]éos ‘‘in Bediirfniss- 
fille,’’ which is neither parallel to the Homeric examples he 
adduces, nor satisfactory in itself. E. Meyer, Forsch. zu Alt. 
Gesch. I, 303, suggested xa7’ ,afeos and Danielsson, Eranos 3, 72, 
takes this up again and advocates it, considering afeos or aféos 
the genitive of a stem afeo-, afoo- ‘‘morning,’’ and making the 
phrase serve merely for closer definition of avtayapo'v, equivalent 
in sense to els TAY avpiov. 


Sane 
SS ke 





IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 75 


3. wapa with the accusative for the dative, in eight dialects. 

Thessalian. SGDI. 345, 13 [214], méorod’ xe ody Kal érépos 
érrivoetcoupev a&ios Tot Tap apye trodtedwatos. Another ex- 
ample occurs in line 18. 

Boeotian. SGDI. 489, 8 [end 38rd. cent.], tas covyypddas tas 
xiwévas Tap Ki¢pova. Examples are frequent throughout this in- 
scription and SGDI. 488 [223-197]. Others are SGDI. 482, 17 
[end 3rd. or beginning 2nd. cent.|, and CIG. 1570, 28 [ca. 71]. 

Phocian. SGDI. 1547, 4 [2nd. cent.], adinti—ta ida copata 
€hev | Pepa |—xat wapaxatat[ Ont] wal pa tors] Geods nai tov ’Ack- 
Aarov. Other examples occur in SGDI. 1555 [Roman]. 

Delphian. SGDI. 1698, 14 [148-100], @ ova map ’Areor'Sav. 
This construction is frequent throughout the manumission decrees. 
Cf. SGDI. 1717, 3, 1718, 18, 1726, 3, etc. Examples occur also 
in 2502, 1, 125 [336-326]. 

Aetolian. Journ. Hell. Stud. 13, 340, no. 2, 10 [ea. 198], 
a @va Tapa Tos apxovtas. Other examples are ib. no. 3, 4; 5, 6; 
6, 11; 8, 10; 9, 7 [Roman]. 

Elean, SGDI. 1172, 5 [1st. half 3rd cent.], Aamoxpatnp 
"Ayntopop Tevédiop tremodtevewp trap’ ape. a 

Laconian. SGDI. 4566, 17 [100-90], «at duverh ypovov af vac- 
Tpepo |uevos tap ae év te tai téyvar ta SiKat[a érro’'no |e Tots 
“pel av Eyoucw. 

Cretan. SGDI. 4991, ITI, 7 [middle 5th. cent.], dumaxoas tav 
yuvaik’ atouoca tav “Aptewwy tap’ "Apvxraiov tap’ tav Toker av. 
Other examples are SGDI. 5151, 8 [before 189], 5150, 9 [after 
167], 5019, 7 [8rd. cent. ]. 

The use of tapa with the accusative for the dative is a rather 
widespread phenomenon in later Greek, in both the literature 
and the inscriptions. This is in accordance with the general late 
Greek encroachment of the accusative (cf. Hatzidakis, Neu-Griech. 
Gram., p. 204, Thumb, Neu-Griech. Volkssprache, p. 120). Upon 
mapa cf. Rau, Curtius Studien 3, 64ff., and Boeckh, CIG. I, p. 
726. 

In the above Thessalian examples a“ué is sometimes taken as 
dative, since tuiv corresponds to it in both instances in Philip’s 


76 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


letter, but the formal difficulty in such an interpretation is more 
serious than the variation in syntax which the accusative reading 
entails. 

The Cretan example quoted is rather puzzling because of the 
uncertainty as to the number of deities implied. Blass, SGDI. 
vol. III, p. 272, ventures no farther than to-note that ’Apu«daiov 
is evidently Apollo. Baunack, Inschr. v. Gortyn, p. 99, translates 
**bei der Artemis <indem sie >an das Amyklaion, an die Bogen- 
gottin<herantritt>.’’ The preposition is however unusual for 
such a meaning, and, partly for this reason, Comparetti, Mon. 
Ant. III, 173, suggests that there must be three deities by whom 
the oath is taken, the third one being perhaps the equivalent of 
Bpctopaptis. The preposition is however equally difficult with 
this interpretation. In the other Cretan examples of oaths (all 
of the third century or later),* no preposition is used in any in- 
stance, although the list of deities is often very long. 


4, mpos with the accusative for the genitive, in Elean. 


SGDI. 1151, 11 [archaic], oudcavtes rro(t) tov Oedv tov ’Odvr- 
[ areov. 

SGDI. 1156, 3 [archaic], ore doxdou xa(r)Artépws Eynv mro(T) Tov 
O[e] dv. 

SGDI. 11538, 6 [archaic], a¢ ce Tis cudaln, Féppnv avTov tro(7) 
tov Aia. 

This construction accords with the Elean use of avevs and tapa 
with the accusative (cf. I, 1, p. 71, and II, 3, p. 75), although here 
a fusion of constructions may exist, due to the possibility of using 
either 7pés with the genitive, in oaths and expressions like the 
examples given above, as Il. 19, 188, émopxeiy mpos Sai'povos, 
or the accusative without a preposition, as Il. 14, 271, viv pou 
Gpoccov adatov Xtuyos Vdwp. 

There is some uncertainty as to the interpretation of the third 
example. Ahrens, Philol. 38, 388, compares Anth. Pal. VII, 


*SGDI. 4952 A, 15, 5023, 12, 5024, 60, 70, 5089, 11, 5041, 13, 19, 5058, 2, 5075, 
73, 5120, 15, 5147b, 5. 


ed 
+ 

veld 

ot 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 77 


433, IX, 61, éppe mo@’ Aidav the meaning then being ‘‘Be under 
the protection of Zeus, no longer of mankind.’’ But to invoke 
the protection of a god for a criminal laid under a curse is strange, 
as urged by Dittenberger Ol. V, p. 30, who remarks that the 
meaning demanded by the context is rather ‘‘ Be an outlaw in his 
relations with Zeus.’’ Danielsson, Eranos 3, 136, translates ‘‘ Er 
soll zum Zeus hin ins Elend gehen,’’ comparing Rohl, IGA. 8, 5, 
Tpnto Kal SapevéccOw évs ’A@avavavy. The example is made more 
perplexing by the fact that Elean shows an instance in evidently 
a somewhat similar meaning with 7p 0s with the genitive, namely 
Jahresh. d. Oesterr. Arch. Inst. in Wien I, 199, 4, gevyéro 
mo(t)T@ Avop todvpra’w aiwatop. With this latter example 
Danielsson compares the Attic pevyeiy €& ’Apet'ou ra’you, suggest- 
ing that Zeus may have been xa@a'povos in Olympia. 


III. Opp cHoIcE OF PREPOSITIONS. 
1. dro for wo in Delphian and Elean. 
Delphian. SGDI. 1684, 5 [150-140], awédoto—o apa yuvarxeiov 


—xabes érictevoe Kadrxpateva tav dvav tar Sedu, ép’ Gite édevO- 
épav eipev Kal avépamrov amo TravTwv. 

Elean. SGDI. 1172, 31 [1st half 3rd cent.], ro dé yadiopa 
TO yeyovop aro Tap Bwodap ypadev ey yadxopua avateds év TO iapov. 

This construction is so common in the Delphian manumission 
decrees that there are but three examples of the use of iro’ in this 
phrase, namely, SGDI. 1895, 6, 1911, 7, 1932, 8, all of the same 
date, 156-151. The Elean instance occurs in an inscription in 
which wird is used for dating (cf. 4, p. 79). Dittenberger Ol. V, 
p- 35, restores td in SGDI. 1159, 6 [1st half 5th cent.], «azo 
T@ Bowe arropnr[fjotat td 7H|v mpokdvwv nai TH ia[p|a[os .. ., 
which is perhaps similar to the above examples. 


2. éwc in epitaphs, in four dialects. 


Boeotian. SGDI. 901 [early], éwt ToAvape’roe etué. Examples 


are numerous. Cf. SGDI. 902, 909, ete. 


78 SYNTAX OF SOME PREPOSITIONS 


Phocian, SGDI. 1515 [early], éwt Maknr. éwi Kaddoi. Ex- 
amples are numerous. Cf. SGDI. 1527, 1532, ete. 

Locrian, OIGS. III, 307 [early], éri Mwada, avdpi robcive 
Sau kai mrA[ati ]ors kai Piro. Another example is CIGS. ITI, 
264 [5th cent. ]. 

Cretan. SGDI. 5137 [late], eri Dira[e] Laow ’Eriberw Opa- 
cayepa a yuva pvapeior. 

In the Attic sepulchral inscriptions no preposition is used. 
The name, parents, etc., of the deceased are briefly enumerated, 
or an epigram is used. In the Latin inscriptions no preposition 
occurs, the proper name being prefaced by Dis Manibus, written 
in full, as CIL. VI, 10559, Dis Manibus Acutiae Chloe, or abbre- 
viated, as CIL. VI, 17608, Dis Man., or CIL. VI, 17616, D. M. 

In Delphian, which might be expected to show a usage similar 
to that in Phocian, only six epitaphs occur, two of which are 
non-dialectic. No preposition is used, except in a metrical non- 
dialectic example, CIG. I, 1722, 2 [late], mavsdod emi POcpevov. 


3. wv for évi in Cyprian. 


a. With the dative. 
SGDI. 74, 3, Adja’Oeue teu Oe@ TH ’Arro(A)AwM dvéOnKe b THya. 


b. With the accusatwwe. 

SGDI. 123, 6, xaréOijav BrAdpowr.(?) t¢érOwv (?) "Edodos & dapuv 
"Héari' wv virripav. 

This preposition is to be compared with Skt. ud, Goth. ut, 
OHG. uz, (K. Vergl. Gr. § 591). It appears in no other dialect, 
having been crowded out by ev’, except in the general Greek com- 
pound derepos.‘ In Cyprian the compounds vev§apevos, tras and 
tynpwv also occur (SGDI. 45, 60). Kretschmer KZ. 31, 415, 
takes U(v) for ovy, like the Hesychian gloss byyeuos- ovrdaBn, 
ete., (for list ef. Hoff. I, p. 201), and the expression ov(v) TUxa 
does occur SGDI. 120, 4, but in SGDI. 60, 28, the one other 
occurrence of ovv in this dialect, the o is written. The commoner 
phrase is (v) rvyat, found in SGDI. 28, 31, 37, ete. 


IN THE GREEK DIALECTS. 79 


4. wo in dating in Elean. 

Ol. V, 36 [365-363], wpo[E]evor — adrol kali yé]vos Lexvovioe 
td [Edda] voducdy ’Aylados PirA[ av] Aveopn[djeos Badvrl[ ros 
K)] eopayo. 

Ol. V, 44, 6 [4th. cent.], d@yypayrau mpdEevov kai evepy| érav 
avrov cal] éx[y]dvo[u]s . . . ov Ei[pla[vr]é[da . . . v] 70 “EA- 
Aavo[S]u[xav . . .] Tipaweérov .. . 

SGDI. 1172, 2 [1st. half 3rd. cent.], QOedp TUya : v7rd “EXXavo- 
dicav Tov rept Atoyvrov. 

The accusative rather than the genitive is to be looked for in 
expressions denoting time with v7é, but the use of any preposition 
is unusual, the ordinary method of giving a date in an inscription 
being the use of the genitive absolute. Sometimes é7v is used, 
one late inscription showing this in Elean also, namely Ol. V, 
52, 49 [ ca. 135]. 






UNIVERSITY } 
eee. 
. OF , 
Sauron 





Sm) 








ree 
hey 






i 


















































ne : ean 
ater 
ea 








a 


U. C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES 











a . a ee Sues 
. : bs 
\ 
‘ 
. 4 

t 

j / 
va 

~ " 
; 
? 


iw Phe 


Ber Sad aa Se 





